Skip the waitlist and invest in blue-chip art for the very first time by signing up for Masterworks: masterworks.art/jackrackam Invest in great masterpieces from artists like Pablo Picasso, Banksy, Andy Warhol, and more. See important Masterworks disclosures: masterworks.io/cd
*Risks of Masterworks:* - Masterworks issuers do not expect to generate revenue, so investors will only recognize a return on their investment if the painting is eventually sold at a profit - No market exists for the shares and paintings are highly illiquid, so you must be prepared to hold your investment for an indefinite period. - Each Issuer owns a single painting and this lack of diversification magnifies risk. - Your ability to trade or sell your shares is highly uncertain. - Paintings may be sold at a loss. - Costs will diminish returns. - Investing in art is subject to numerous risks, including (i) claims with respect to authenticity or provenance, (ii) physical damage, (iii) legal challenges to ownership, (iv) market risks, (v) economic risks and (vi) fraud. - Timing of sale of a painting is uncertain.
Elizabeth II is a queen but she is also a mother. and i know there will be a lot of hate come to my way but at the current state of her country and her family.i say she failed at both of the jobs. FYI, i am from Vietnam and Elizabeth II supported the colonists french to return to Vietnam twice.so i am a little bias
This video was a lovely tribute to the late Queen. Great job Jack. I remember hearing when she passed. I was on my way to work when I heard it on the radio with my mom. My heart goes out to the late queen's family. I'm sure they're grieved a lot since her passing. Which is understandable. Can't wait till your next video Jack.
it's not a good investment strategy and a terrible way to keep your money safe please stop peddling this scam. it's like saying people should just buy a tonne of gold cause it holds value which is already stupid, except paintings don't have any solid value and the prices are constantly inflated by the Uber rich
The Royal Family bring in WAY more money to the UK than they cost. I think CGP Grey did a nice little breakdown of how beneficial they are for the country in terms of tourism and taxes. They're not going anyway soon.
That was the most frog in a pot of boiling water ad I’ve ever seen, literally I didn’t realize it WAS an ad until you showed the offer at the end of it. Jacky Racky 1/ me 0
I'd be down with the lottery idea I liked Elizabeth but don't really care about the others and I'll be honest here in Australia it's mixed a best our feelings on the monarchy it ranges from people hating on her for colonialism, people loving her and people not caring at all me personally grew up with her as my queen and always liked her she seemed like you said everyone's grandma
When the Saudi king came to visit Balmoral (after refusing to allow Saudi women to drive) he was invited for a drive with the Queen, at the time he thought she'd be a passenger like him. Then she climbed into the drivers seat and tore up and down the roads on the estate while he was trying to politely ask her to stop and let him out, apparently Abdullah forgot that she was a driver and mechanic in WW2
Her death wasn't untimely. She was 96 years old and had been having "mobility issues" for a number of years, with public engagements increasingly limited. When the news broke she was under "medical supervision", a lot of us guessed her death was imminent and the media activated their protocols for it. It was sudden but not shocking.
It's hilarious that there's so little to talk about, the life of the person who wrote a respectful tell-all book is more talked about than the one of the queen.
"Imagine France Having a British Head of State" It is remarkable how many times that has almost happened in history, from the Angevin Empire to the Franco-British Union.
@@switchplayer1016 Eh, technically she has older Scottish and English roots (though the older English roots come through the blood ties of her Scottish ancestors). It only starts with William from a very distinctly Norman/'English' perspective. William's second son literally married someone who's father was a Scottish king and who's mother was a descendant of no less than six "English" monarchs, the oldest of which was Alfred the Great. Oh and just to be clear, William's second son is the one from whom Elizabeth is descended.
@@switchplayer1016 Nah fam, Elizabeth's family was The House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, later renamed The House of Windsor. There is not a line from William The conqueror to The Windsor family. The line cuts in 1154 when the last descendant of William the conqueror lost a civil war and The House of Plantagenet took over.
All the while Juan Ponce Enrile of the Philippines, born in 1924, still is politically active to this day as presidential legal counsel to the President of the Philippines, who happens to be the son of his first boss...
that wasn't the main reason but yhhh, he was more political than Parliament would have liked e.g. made a statement saying the somebody had to better tackle poverty when visiting a mining village and yes he was chummy with "charlie chaplin" originally just a sympathiser before becoming a full on "charlie chaplin" supporter, after abdicating he even went on a tour of Germany with Wallis Simpson. Also interesting fact, the Prime Minister at the time of the abdication crisis tried persuading him to keep Wallis as a mistress which was more socially acceptable at the time than marrying her
Most of that came after the fact (indeed few of the elite at the time took Germany to be the main thteat), but rather that he seemed to have an active interest in politics and a dangerous among of support among the public to back it up, it was a moral issue for a good few churchmen but for the politicians it was a matter of nipping any confrontation over their increasing seizure of power from the Crown and Lords and undermining of the traditional rights and liberties extended to the population of the country (as well as for various malicious activities against potential alternative power blocks).
2:52 the reason he couldn't marry her and stay king wasn't just because she was divorced, it was specifically that the previous husband was still alive. Second marriages after divorce were fine, as long as the first spouse was dead.
Well, Catherine of Aragon was alive for Henry VIII second and third marriage, but at least he had Anne Boleyn beheaded the day before his third wedding, so I guess he gets points for never having had more than one former wife alive at the same time. But that's not really the point, they can make up whatever rules they like, it's just ridiculus to justify it by appealing to a church that was SPECIFICALLY founded so a king could divorce his wife and remarry.
@@larskerkhoff3919, that wasn’t simply a divorce. He had sought an annulment on the grounds that it was unlawful for him to marry his brother’s widow. The Pope wouldn’t declare that marriage null because he (or his predecessor, can’t remember at the moment) had given Henry and Catherine a dispensation to marry in spite of that same issue. After severing the English church from Rome, that case was heard in an ecclesiastical court that ultimately answered to Henry VIII, which declared the marriage null like he wanted.
@@wstevenbrown And do you think Henry was suddenly very sincerely concerned with the biblical legality of levirate marriage or was that merely a pathetic excuse for his real motivation? Three of his divorces were claimed to be anulments by him, with Catherine Howard he didn't even bother to do that. If the law is whatever the king says, technicalities like that don't really matter, only what he does and why he does it.
If the queen felt any sadness at the ebbing popularity of the monarchy among the British public, she can take some solace from the fact that the last prime minister she appointed would overshadow any negative sentiment towards the royals by forever becoming associated with Elisabeth's death, and an economic crash so bad, she could be considered to have killed both queen AND country. As creepy as the coffin camera during her funeral procession was, at least it was muted. Otherwise we would have been treated to the corpse's uncontrolled laughter at Truss' suffering. Never doubt someone who claims that if you strike them down, they will become more powerful than you imagine.
Hello I'm from the future. Not only the lettuce doesn't shy away from the public after indirectly killing the Queen, she now formed a new right wing party that screams Russia funded facisit party. In England. After making the country lose billions in weeks. Huh. Shame does not come natural to some.
It's pretty tragic when you think about it that way, but that's how it always tends to be with celebrity sorts, especially those who hold even a fraction of influence over policy. Fame and wealth aside, I can only imagine it's rather lonely, living like that, knowing that almost all the people who know of you only know the image put out for them and that having real personal connections with people will always be impeded by your image that has to come first over your feelings. Humans were really not designed to live like that.
@@Starfloofle Exactly - I'm not really a monarchist, but the psychology of kingship is a fascinating one for all those reasons. Kings can't really have friends the way most normal people do - you wonder how crushingly lonely Louis XIV or Peter the Great must've felt some nights.
@@Replicaate, I mean, Louis XlV and Pyotr l were also murderous assholes who plunged their countries into war, famine, and economic chaos to sate their own egos, so how much sympathy should we really be feeling for them?
3:08 Technically it wasn't the divorce that the issue, it was the fact that her husbands were all still alive. If she had divorced and then her husbands died it would be ok by Church laws.
Which still silly considering that henry the eigth the guy who created this church divorced and remarried as he pleased. His first wife died after the second and the fourth outlived the sixth.
@@larskerkhoff3919 Annulment and divorce, though similar in result, are not the same thing. Annulment is used for marriages that should not have happened whether by religious or secular law, i.e. a couple in Brazil were both adopted children, come to find out they were actually siblings who the parents had given up at birth (which has happened a few times actually), the marriage would be terminated via annulment, not divorce. Legally and religiously, it is considered to have never happened. Divorce means that the law and church recognize the marriage once existed as there was nothing to make it illegal. Catherine of Aragon was Arthur's widow, and was technically not supposed to have been allowed to marry Henry at all.
@@larskerkhoff3919 And the third one died two years before he married his fourth, whom he never had sex with thus making the marriage unfulfilled and easy to annul, then he killed the fifth, and the sixth outlived him.
All objective arguments against the monarchy aside, I am pretty sure people aren't fans of Charles specifically. Like you know that thing about Elizabeth, where she was careful not to express any opinion that might be considered controversial, becoming a kind of non-controversial, bipartisan figurehead? Yeah, Charles can't really do that.
(Pre-Premire)Jack DEFINITELY had this video on the back burner for a while it'd usually take up to most of a month to make a video like this on the regular. But with the video dropping so soon it leads me to believe he had it ready or at least 90% done by the time all this stuff happened (During Primere) I KNEW IT
I don't think that they will disappear any time soon. Much like the kings of Belgium, Norway, and spain they will fade into irrelevance but still be there.
@@larskerkhoff3919 and killing the monarchs will improve the situation how? Do you expect to sell the crown jewels of Sweden at auction, or rent the royal residence of the Spanish crown as a bed and breakfast? Europe has killed kings before in times of hardship, but it has only see times grow harder. I many not agree with a monarchy, but I rather not see a break down of Europe in another orgie of blood.
@@terrynewsome6698 the jewelry will be return to the colonized countries, the rest to charity and museums. This time no more monarchs, but Anarcho communist communes, no bigger than 10,000 each, and direct democracy instead of cheating representatives
I like the monarchy as an institution in terms of the link to our history, even though some of the individual members are questionable in their morality
There's absolutely no relation between a country having the queen as a head of state and a country being or not in the Commonwealth. That line about France having a british head of state makes no sense.
You do realise that seven countries of the Commonwealth have the Queen(and now the King) as head of state? Do a bit of research before opening your mouth buddy.
@@Sivrn-Val Many countries, mostly former colonies, are still part of the Commonwealth despite having broken away from having the British monarchy as a head of state.
he was referring to the Franco-British Union where the French government had excepted having the Queen as head of state if the UK was willing to go through with the Union but then the Americans stepped in and put the squeeze on the money. We dipped out of the Suez crisis then so did France leaving Israel holding the bag on that one. And thats how we got the EU since that pissed off the French enough that they started to play nice with the Germans.
I was hoping to hear a mention of when she did directly involve herself in politics-- like attempting to avoid paying that income tax with some "serious discussions" amongst high-placed politicians about the matter.
The monarchy is a business, an institution. Most business are family businesses. Which are inherited hereditarily. So… people who believe the position shouldn’t be hereditary, maybe all the family owned businesses should also be shut down.
Young people have always been indifferent to the monarchy (they don’t hate it) until the grow up. If you do serious research into constitutional monarchy it’s easy to see why it’s the best form of government (read Bagehot)
As an American, I actually wish we had stayed a colony. I'd take any form of universal healthcare, actual gun control, and an actually functioning public transportation system over the deliberate and perpetual dumpster fire we have here in the states 😂
"The trouble is caused by unthinking people who carelessly throw away ageless ideals as if they were old and outworn machinery. They would have religion thrown aside, morality in personal and public life made meaningless, honesty counted as foolishness and self-interest set up in place of self-restraint. Today we need a special kind of courage, not the kind needed in battle but a kind which makes us stand up for everything that we know is right, everything that is true and honest. We need the kind of courage that can withstand the subtle corruption of the cynics so that we can show the world that we are not afraid of the future." - Queen Elizabeth II Personally, what made her significant, to me, is that she was one of the last public people in any position of power in the West to think this way. And she died... So did my grandpa -- a man who used the last of his wealth to try to keep his little part of Managua fed while the communists were starving her. And Mr. Ifshin -- a sort of adoptive grandpa to me -- a Jewish man with a great sense of humor who flew several B-25 Mitchell missions over Sicily during the war to be shot down on his 60th and was held as a PoW. And then there was Dennis (only knew him as that), a former airplane mechanic who served all the way up to the Korean war, who told me about his brother's great bravery and lamented he wasn't in the sky with him. Years passed and he still kicked himself in the shins because he felt guilty for the man's death, until he found a community in church that helped him process his loss correctly. These people aren't around anymore. And I'm probably part of the last generation (millennial) to be exposed to them in the West. It shows..... My move to Romania from the US in 2008 was made in this context. In anticipation that with the departure of everyone understanding truths we have long been blind to, we'd transform into the society we are today. Now I live in the sphere of influence of Poland and Ukraine, two countries that will continue to assert their sovereignty with millions upon millions of people whose fervor can be felt in the moment that they say "Bring it on" to sanctions and war against them. This is why since the war broke out I've been doing everything in my power to help, mobilizing business owners I am good friends with here to deliver supplies and rations where they are most needed from our little safe haven in Romania. I wish we didn't have to be alone in being normal societies. But it is so, and all we can do is fight our fights here while hoping some of the West gets their **** together and ends their own period of decadence while we focus on holding back Russia's. Queen Elizabeth's death, in my opinion, represents the passing of what is left of the legacy of the West's greatness, but I think the best years are ahead.... Just give it a century or two ;) Intre timp rămân unde omenirea nu s-a putrezit.
Personally, I see the Royal Family as a relic from a bygone era. And much like a relic in a museum, people pay to goggle at it thus generating revenue for those either running the "museum" (in this case the government) or making merchandise of it. While I would certainly not shed a tear if britain were to decide to get rid of their royal figure heads (I'd most likely just shrug and move on with my life), right now, I see no good reason to remove it, either. To me as a non-Englishman, it sounds like it would be more beneficial for Britain to keep 'em around then to sack 'em.
@@Tacom4ster You do realize 90% of that stuff was sold at what the previous owners considered a fair price right? If I sell a house and two years later oil is discovered there, do I have the right to demand my land back at no cost?
Elizabeth is probably the best controversial historical figure in living memory. On one hand, she was (and always will be) synonymous with the late British Empire and then the Commonwealth, neither of which are without their issues that still impacts geopolitics to this very day. Yet at the same time, there's really no one else that embodies best what people like about the UK, or that so much about her personality and actual opinions died with her. Her death is going to mark a turning point in British history and government, as well as how they're perceived on the international stage.
I hope the monarchy will survive. They should reduce the amount of money being given to the royal family, and have more people spreading pro-Monarchists arguments and ideas. I wish we Americans had a Monarchy.
It is worth pointing out that all profits from the royal estate (about $200 million) goes to parliament in exchange for about $50 Million annual salary for the royals and that is money that would stop flowing into the government coffers if the UK became a republic so...
Nope! Not true, I was Times 06 person of the year. I remember clearly being told, to my face when I asked who it was, Time said “Times person of the year this year is you”. Although I was surprised, It was about time if you ask me
Given how much of a punching bag in public discourse Charles has been for decades, smart money is against the monarchy at this point. Not that I have any particular use for the institution.
Most unlikely considering trends of public support and the loyalties of the military, if he is going to live up to his namesakes then dissolving parliament would be the most likely event, especially given the political turmoil we are likely to see this decade and the ever low public support for the government. Though as the problems the country have are a good deal deeper and many lay with unelected institutions such as the civil service so I somewhat doubt what it would achieve.
@@vorynrosethorn903yeah...no. No monarch is going to dissolve Parliament on their own initiative in 2024. That would have been impossible in 1924 and 1824, never mind the present day.
People like to write alternate histories of the Nazis winning WWII or the South winning the civil war, but someone needs to write an alternate history of France joining the commonwealth stat! Everything about it is hilarious.
Are you serious? So much of her life is portrayed all the time, the only reason people don't really know much is because the truth is so glamourised and she herself was turned into a far better person than she actually was
