It's about as tone deaf as spending money preserving a bunch of old stuff that isn't directly useful to anyone nowadays. These critiques apply equally to the monarchy as they do to museums. The fact of the matter remains that changing the logo on a few things has an incalculably small cost and was likely fulfilled by people the government would have on payroll either way.

Extrapolating from your argument, do you think all traditions aught to stop when the economy takes a downturn? It's not as if having a monarchy, or maintaining any of the other traditions, comes at the cost of people being driven to poverty. We have the resources as a society to both provide a decent standard of living for people and to maintain our culture and traditions. It's ridiculous to think that cutting costs on the latter will do any good for the former; it will just free up money to be mismanaged elsewhere, or go on tax cuts for the rich. Your argument here isn't based on actually solving any real problem, just that you don't like the vibes of the situation.

I'll assume, given your high tax bracket, that you also have a high income. If so, it's pretty presumptuous for you to speak on behalf of poor people, who generally seem to quite like the monarchy in my experience. Being so starkly pro-austerity that you won't let them spend a little money on changing a few logos seems exceedingly out of touch, given the decade+ of austerity and cost-cutting that lead us to the current situation.

You are missing the point entirely. This is about vanity from the most privileged person in the country - vanity that we all have to pay for one way or another.

It is entirely pointless that we as a society have to pander to the current monarch's preferred fucking crown, especially when so many people are deciding between feeding themselves or turning the heating on (and other unenviable decisions)

Once again, you are very angry on behalf of people who probably disagree with you about this. I also have to question if you have actually if you've actually seen the change in question. It is the same design with one extra circle added, and the top bits shifted up a little. I could do that in about 5 minutes in photoshop. Tying this to Charles's choice also a bit of a stretch. He probably didn't think about the few places where the crown was shown on its own, since most of the re-branding involves his initials/face which he cannot change. You speak as if everyone in England is being personally subjected to his whims here, when really he made a relatively minor choice based on his tastes (and potentially not wanting to wear his dead mother's hat), which then caused some small changes to logos in other places. Heinz Ketchup is going to have to take the royal seal off the bottles because Charles doesn't like it as much as his mum did. Is this some kind of massive issue as well? Such decisions are made by random people all the time. Someone decided to subject you to a change in the colour of milk bottle caps which is much more impactful and I hardly think you are as angry about that.