Yeah, swiss secrecy law will not permit us to know how much the king has stashed away in the legendary swiss bank. Ameet Dhakal probably painted our king as poorer than the stray dog of Kathmandu for pecuniary gains. Dhakal's gotta learn to have some respect for the king. The latter didn't ascend the throne - or the top of the Nepali food chain - to be poor. Did he? What definition of "poor" is Ameet Dhakal using here? That the King's intake of daily calories is less than the minimum recommended by WHO? (Check out his fat-laden neck) Is he implying that the King leaves on USD 1 per day? (Minister Ram Sharan Mahat promised him around 3-4 milion USD in his last "peace budget" sppech) That he lives on a shack by the bank of the stinking Bagmati? (The last time I checked he lived in the poshest palace in the land). That he crosses a river by tieing himself to a "ghirling" like many poor of Nepal do? (He flies in and out on a chopper.) That he bicycles to work? (He's go tmercedez benzes and what work anyway?) King powerless? Relatively powerless, Yes. King poor? Hell no! If Ameet calls the King of Nepal poor, that should be taken as a grave insult to the poor people of Nepal from koshi to mahakali.