You are wrong as to the reason that the US separated itself from the King of England. The reason can be found in the first two paragraphs of the Declaration of Independence. It was not about money or the equal distribution thereof, it was about governance.
Jefferson writes,
"When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another....a decent respect ...requires that they should declare the causes that impel them to the separation.
"all men are created equal; they are endowed... with certain [inherent and ] inalienable rights; that among these are life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes."
In other words they did not reject the monarchy because they thought they all deserved what the king had but that the king was not living up to his responsibility to support the life liberty and happiness of the goverened and the governed refused to follow any longer.
In Canada we chose to stay with the crown and our history is what it is. I personally believe that eventually the monarchy will be replaced. One more bad king or queen should just about do it. It is in large part due to Elizabeth II's excellence and honourable reign that we still have a monarch.
If a Canadian is so disgusted that we still have a queen then that person should have the guts to leave Canada and find greener pastures elsewhere.