If you go back through the links I posted, it includes far more sweeping legislature vetting than what affected her personally. And also exempting people from non-dicrimination law because they have certain ancestory is weird, isn't it?

The power to do what, for example?

To stop people advancing in their career because of the colour of their skin. The power to take dead people's money if they don't have a will. The power to direct the army (the armed forces oaths are to the monarch, not the country or government - this was almost tested in planned coups in 1968 and 1974; both actively planned by King Charles' great-uncle and led to a "military exercise" that Downing Street weren't informed of as a warning to toe the Firm line).

Or how about a ban on police searching their properties for stolen goods? Or exemptions to green bills.

The royal family are like lobbyists on steroids and the idea that has no power is not correct.

The money they receive from the UK taxpayers is tiny.

This is patently false. £100m a year for FIVE PEOPLE (active royals) is by no means a small amount. This is the same as 3096 incomes for the average household in the UK, or 4467.7 nurses with five years experience.

Why do they deserve to get this money if not because it's their "divine right"? How is that not utterly fucked up?

And the "tourism" answer doesn't hold water. Both the Louvre and the Palace of Versailles, both former palaces, receives 50% more visitors than Buckingham Palace.

Please bear in mind that this is all for one family that have done absolutely nothing to earn it. How can we justify £100m a year (much of which ended up in the Panama and Paradise papers) for a single family? And that doesn't even take their net wealth into account.

Like the income of the people mentioned below is actually tiny, but their wealth is huge. About £20 BILLION huge. And all because of "divine rights". But of course, that's only an estimate because the royal family got the law changed so they never have to say how much they actually have (because they have the power to change laws, as mentioned above).

Do you think it’s massively different from the Walton family’s wealth and power, or the Koch family’s wealth and power, or Musk, Gates, Bezos, etc?

Absolutely agree. No one should be able to pass on this amount of wealth through a hereditary line. It just has no moral justification to give people money (and thus power) just for being born. That's why capitalists were nicknamed robber barons.