Visiting and smiling! That's me persuaded.
In totality over decades, that's a huge positive impact on the populace.
But sneerers will always sneer.
Is it really a fact? You think they’d have been less diligent or enthusiastic in their good deeds without her ‘inspiration’?
This is a woman that could have funded food banks for a year from her personal wealth without the tiniest blip on her bank statement, and people are supposed to be inspired to carry on rattling collecting boxes on the High Street?
It is a fact, as observed by me on several occasions.
You seem to think the Queen should donate a vast proportion of her money to charity.
Why pick on her?
Would you do the same?
That's more tenuous than tangible.
That's the nature of being the head of an organisation/figurehead.
Will Jeff Bezos be delivering your next Amazon parcel, or will Elon Musk bang the hubcaps on your new Tesla?
Of course not, but they still have a crucial role to play in their respective businesses.
TBH I think the late Queen was a bit of an outlier; she did have the effect on people that
@Pale Rider asserts.
Her son, I think, is a reversion to norm.
That's true, the Queen had the title going for her and a truly remarkable cult of personality - a bit like Hitler in that respect.
Charles has the title of King, but next to nothing in the personality department.
The good news for him is Camilla, despite a very rocky start, does have a tiny sprinkle of stardust.
Longer term, William seems steady rather than spectacular, a bit like his father, but Kate, while she could never match the Queen, does have a great deal of whatever it is that makes a truly popular monarch.
Interesting, that in a country supposedly full of misogynists, it's the women who have most of the talent and therefore power in our Royal Family.
All of which is very bad news for the abolitionists on here who are all but guaranteed to die without seeing their wishes fulfilled.
