ahahahahhaha.. taxes are for the poor didn't you know that already?
— ડ୧ñ߀ƦιՇ∂ 🫦 (@CryptoSenorita) September 10, 2022
Miss Crypto thought that it was some horrible "rich people" exemption that kept the Crown's wealth contained within...well, the Crown...rather than any specific member of the Royal Family. While several media outlets seem to have trouble with this concept, it literally makes sense to anybody with the smallest understanding of royal houses across literally the history of the globe.
The British Exchequer collects money to allow...what's that phrase...His Majesty's Government to operate. Remember it's only an extremely recent (and ultimately needless) development for the House of Windsor to have to pay to the Exchequer in the first place, and there are certainly more good arguments against the practice than for it. That it makes absolutely no sense for the Sovereign to pay taxes to fund his own government of course tops the list.
Another question perhaps should be why ડ୧ñ߀ƦιՇ∂ thinks "taxes are for the poor". In the United Kingdom, 60% of the taxes are paid by only 10% of the population, and if you think those 10% are the poor ones then you're awfully bad at math. In fact 9% of those 10% are getting off easy, as they only pay half of what that top 1% pays. Considering that the only fair income tax system is a flat tax, this is a far bigger problem for the British Empire than the head and indeed embodiment of the Imperial Government not paying them.
Indeed perhaps the ultimate followup question would be "hey Senorita would you therefore support the immediate abolition of the inheritance tax?" It's not even that radical: His Majesty's senior dominions of Canada and Australia don't have inheritance taxes, nor do ten other countries in the OECD -- a full third of the richest countries don't have direct inheritance taxes (as many people including my father have noted in the past, Canada does have indirect inheritance taxes).
Has she attended a single anti-tax rally? Participated in a single anti-tax conference? Or is her anger just in this (as we've established, inaccurate) claim that "taxes are for the poor" and not the tax itself?
Once you start opposing all taxes at all times against all people, then we'll take your republican sentiments somewhat seriously.
