[Closed] The Greens are coming! Quick, panic!

Anyone with any common sense would probably be too busy being a bit embarrassed by your suggestion that the Green party are going to stage a coup.

Exactly how else would hold such a policy down, whilst the rest of the world powered ahead - ignoring the kooks that were now running the UK?

They couldn't.

[i]They shouldn't be, but the greens more so than anyone[/i]

Could you maybe explain how the Greens ideological approach is any different to/deeper than the Tory one, as an example?

Neither can the Greens, or you, make a case for managed decline and the inevitable joblessness that would be associated with such a policy.

I don't know what you're talking about. If you want a proper discussion, then quote their main policy commitments and provide us with evidence as to why they won't work.

"The monarchy will be abolished" and the bit about not teaching religion in schools are two of the main reasons to vote for them!

Give them a go, seriously, what's the worst that can happen? Things might actually improve.

The monarchy will be abolished

Yay! French stylee I hope! 😀

[img] [/img]

As long as they don't start waving pints around in a pub, I'm happy to vote for a better use of the television medium.

Wwaswas, the independent schools may have claimed tax relief to the tune of £100m or so but the additional cost to the state of educating their 615,000 pupils would be around £4.5b in direct costs and likely many more times that in capital costs to build the space required. £100m to save £4.5b seems like a pretty good return.

And I'm really sorry for making all those people think I really thought the Greens were the next Khmer Rouge

I just thought referencing an organisation that murdered 2 million people made you look like a bit of a knob.

I just thought referencing an organisation that murdered 2 million people made you look like a bit of a knob.

“Alternative” medicine will be promoted.

I'm out.

I don't know what you're talking about. If you want a proper discussion, then quote their main policy commitments and provide us with evidence as to why they won't work.

The party’s manifesto argues for zero, or even negative growth and falling levels of personal consumption. Britain would be in permanent recession; families would become materially poorer each year.

As to why that won't work, see rest of world.

“Alternative” medicine will be promoted.

LMFAO!

I think it was more the empty the cities and head into the fields bit, rather than the head count reduction he was talking about

If it wsa done after an intelligence test, I would vote for a cull, rid this land of a few chavs and prisoners, would that really be so bad?

As to why that won't work, see rest of world.

I asked you to quote their manifesto, not what the Torygraph thinks of it.

“Alternative” medicine will be promoted.

I can't find that on their website...

I agree with the sentiment of the Greens:

A system based on inequality and exploitation is threatening the future of the planet on which we depend, and encouraging reckless and environmentally damaging consumerism.

A world based on cooperation and democracy would prioritise the many, not the few, and would not risk the planet’s future with environmental destruction and unsustainable consumption.

...but yeah, there policies do seem pretty crazy (even accounting for The Telegraph re-wording them). However, it says they were last main draft was in 1990.

Maybe now people are falling out of favour with the main parties, some suitably high-calibre people will be attracted to parties that previously wouldn't have been anywhere near power, and rewrite them (as happened to UKIP recently)

[i]Wwaswas, the independent schools may have claimed tax relief to the tune of £100m or so but the additional cost to the state of educating their 615,000 pupils would be around £4.5b in direct costs and likely many more times that in capital costs to build the space required. £100m to save £4.5b seems like a pretty good return. [/i]

One assumes that parents of these children are currently spending more than £4.5billion/annum on their education - typically 3-4 times probably.

It's more than £100 million subsidy - see above.

Will that 'discretionary' spend that currently goes on school fees not then go elsewhere and be taxed (either as VAT or something else)?

also, what proportion of the 615000 are pupils who are not UK residents and would thus not enter the state system in any case?

I wonder whether the people of Brighton understand that their MP is in favour of decriminalizing Al-Qaeda and ISIS. Given it's a city with a large number of retirees I cannot imagine their inheritance tax proposals will find much support either

The list of Green party policies makes UKIP look middle of the road. Having seen them we do need them in a debate, they'll be a laughing stock.

Can we just discuss this "Common sense" thing for a second? What does it actually mean?

The overall mindset of the people clearly varies significantly accross a variety of issues, hence the existence of a range of political parties, different coloured wallpaper, preference for hardtails or fullsofas and so on and so forth.

Where is this "common" sense of which some speak? Or is it a mirage and a misidentifying of the proponent's views as "commonly held" or "correct" rather than universal?

I don't think it's a term that stands up to any scrutiny, and perhaps we'd all be able to understand what people were really saying if they cut it out.

PS: definitely read their site, not the Telegraph interpretation e.g.

What the Greens say on their website

"It will make full-time paid employment less necessary, and will encourage home-based and part-time employment, and work in the 'third sector'. People will be able to choose their own working lifestyles"

The Telegraph spin...

"the Greens argue that government policy should make paid work “less necessary”, with people making their living from the home-based “informal economy”"

One assumes that parents of these children are currently spending more than £4.5billion/annum on their education - typically 3-4 times probably.

It's more than £100 million.

Will that 'discretionary' spend that currently goes on school fees not then go elsewhere and be taxed (either as VAT or something else)?

also, what proportion of the 615000 are pupils who are not UK residents and would thus not enter the state system in any case?

I would imagine a large portion of that school fee money would be invested in property otherwise or put into pensions.

10% of private school kids are non UK resident would be my guess, higher for some top schools of course but not across the whole country

They can say whatever the f they like in the secure knowledge that they will never be called upon to deliver it, but it will attract the kind of batshit mental demographic that they want.

Bit like the LibDems before it all went wrong and they ended up in coalition, dropping their manifesto promises left, left, and left.

The Greens hope to get 3 seats, that's less than 0.5% of the seats in Parliament so they will quite rightly have zero impact on Government

I wonder whether the people of Brighton understand that their MP is in favour of decriminalizing Al-Qaeda and ISIS.

Has anyone ever actually been convicted of being a member of either of these organisations? Its just one of those stupid pointless laws, put on the statute books to stop the Daily Mail humphing for 30 seconds. Our legal system is littered with this type of unenforceable, ill-conceived, barely thought through, back of a fag packet, tabloid pacifying nonsense.

Dangerous Dogs Act anyone?

[i]I wonder whether the people of Brighton understand that their MP is in favour of decriminalizing Al-Qaeda and ISIS.[/i]

I've had a quick look on their website (particularly at their 2010 manifesto) and can't see this mentioned?

[edit]
There's a bit in here about not outlawing organisations but still beign illegal to aid or abet or fund terrorism - is that the thing? I guess it's a freedom of speech choice, isn;t it?
[i]
Terrorism

PD440 Terrorism is an extremely loaded term, frequently used by those in power to justify excessive use of force or the weakening of controls on the exercise of their power. Sometimes governments justify their own terrorist acts by labelling any groups that resist their monopoly of violence "terrorist". A Green government, by implementing principles laid out elsewhere in this manifesto, particularly those of self-determination and non-interventionist foreign policies, would seek to overcome the unjust divisions within our global and domestic society and address the desperate motivations that lie behind many atrocities labelled "terrorist".

PD441 However, democratic societies need to protect themselves against those who seek to use terror and violence against them and to have plans in place that mitigate against the effects of attack. In a complex, modern society, it will be a long time before we can entirely eradicate the root causes of "terrorism". Any measures to protect society should not undermine the fundamental values that shape a green society: inclusion, justice and equality.

PD442 Police and intelligence investigations of terrorist activity need to be well resourced, and given sufficient freedom to ensure their safety and efficacy. They must, though, be carried out in a transparent and accountable way, and remain within the law.

PD443 Those accused or found guilty of atrocities, or planning to commit, aid or abet in their execution, should be dealt with under the same principles as those accused of more conventional criminal activities. In particular, those accused of supporting terrorist acts should have normal rights against arbitrary arrest or imprisonment. It should not be a crime simply to belong to an organisation or have sympathy with its aims, though it should be a crime to aid and abet criminal acts or deliberately fund such acts.

PD444 We support the inclusion of crimes of terrorism in the mandate of the International Criminal Court and, in the meantime, the use of ad hoc courts under UN auspices, on neutral territory but under the law of the country in which the crime was committed.

PD445 The contribution of particular activities (such as air travel and nuclear power) to the general risk to society of massive attack should be ad[/i]equately factored into public choice about their funding and future.

Would like to see the logic that ends up with them being be anti religion in schools but pro alternative medicine.

The Greens hope to get 3 seats, that's less than 0.5% of the seats in Parliament so they will quite rightly have zero impact on Government

All that tells us is that FPTP is very poor at representing the will of the electorate.

Would like to see the logic that ends up with them being be anti religion in schools but pro alternative medicine.

All I can see on their website is that they're in favour of regulating alternative medicines so they're safe. That's a good thing, isn't it?

church schools will be stripped of taxpayer funding. Religious instruction will be banned in school hours.
Sold.

Sold here too, if anyone from a party with a realistic chance of power are reading this... please stop subsidizing the instruction of our children to live their lives according to some Iron Age fairy tale.

Indoctrinate your children by all means but don't expect the taxpayer to fund it.

Strange, about a quarter of UK primary schools are owned by the church (land, buildings or both) who allow the government to use them free of charge,

The Green Party policy appears to require shutting about 4500 schools. Can you imagine if the Tories suggested that?

Presumably they mean 'church' schools that aren't in voluntary local council control.

Strange, about a quarter of UK primary schools are owned by the church (land, buildings or both) who allow the government to use them free of charge,

Really? Round here, the church has allowed the state to rebuild its schools for free, and provide 95% of the funding needed to run them. In return, the church sets an admissions policy that excludes most of the local community.

ransos - Member
All I can see on their website is that they're in favour of regulating alternative medicines so they're safe. That's a good thing, isn't it?

well, let's have a look:

H326 ...a single agency... will ensure that medicines meet minimum safety standards, provide clear labelling of both ingredients and side-effects. The agency will cover existing synthetic medicines as well as those considered as natural or alternative medicines.

HE349 Assisted death presents moral and legal concerns to health care professionals and the public ... [b]Alternatives[/b], such as palliative care must be discussed with the patient

For individuals suffering from mental health distress, a range of evidence-based therapies and treatments will be readily available, based on the NICE guidelines. Provision of talking therapies should be made more readily available either in addition to or as an [b]alternative[/b] to medication.

crazy talk!

[i]The Green Party policy appears to require shutting about 4500 schools.[/i]

or, like the Tories want to do, the state could just lease the school premises from a private organisation (in this case the Church) and carry on as normal just without the indoctrination bit. The extra income woudl get the CofE out of a lot of financial difficulties they face too.

Can we just discuss this "Common sense" thing for a second? What does it actually mean?

...

I don't think it's a term that stands up to any scrutiny, and perhaps we'd all be able to understand what people were really saying if they cut it out.

Oi! Stop that! There's people here trying to have a froth-mouthed, bug-eyed political screeching match based solely on cherry-picked assertions in a one-sided, click-baity article from a famously partisan newspaper's website. How are they supposed to get all het up and fractious with spoilsports like you asking sensible question and defining terms and whatnot?

crazy talk!

I know, what a bunch of yoghurt-knitters! It's no wonder people think UKIP are sane by comparison.

Would like to see the logic that ends up with them being be anti religion in schools but pro alternative medicine.

<edit>looks like ahwiles did the same ctrl+F speed read on the greens I did 🙂
apologies if you did actually read all that ahwiles

In return, the church sets an admissions policy that excludes most of the local community.

In all maintained Schools the admissions policy has to follow legislation and the governments school admissions code. Thry can't just make it up like you're inferring.

Why on earth would alternative medicine need regulating? Its not as if it actually does anything 😆

All that tells us is that FPTP is very poor at representing the will of the electorate.

I'm reminded of the following quote -
[i]"The sick in soul insist that it is humanity that is sick, and they are the surgeons to operate on it. They want to turn the world into a sickroom. And once they get humanity strapped to the operating table, they operate on it with an ax."[/i]

Ahh Tom, why am I thinking of Mr Osbourne's economic policies?

In all maintained Schools the admissions policy has to follow legislation and the governments school admissions code. Thry can't just make it up like you're inferring

Voluntary-aided schools are free to set faith-based criteria, which they indeed do. In practice, that means my local secondary school excludes all but a tiny handful of its local community.

D0NK - Member

looks like ahwiles did the same ctrl+F speed read on the greens I did
apologies if you did actually read all that ahwiles

ctrl+F is one of those little things that makes modern life possible.

But we don't know how people would vote under PR, I strongly suspect based on these polices that if we had PR in the UK the Greens wouldn't get 11% of the vote.

They've done consistently well in European elections which are PR so it's hard to say.

Anyway, if their share was actually the number of voters who wanted them in power (rather than a protest) that's a good thing, right?

Why on earth would alternative medicine need regulating? Its not as if it actually does anything

Neither does cough medicine...

[url=

them lightly at your peril...[/url]

(sorry) 😳

Voluntary-aided schools are free to set faith-based criteria, which they indeed do.

According to legislation created by a democratically elected government, in return for the use of land and buildings.

You can't get away from the fact that a quarter of all primary schools are owned by the church, and the Greens have announced a plan to close them.

Worth recalling that a few local authorities and the church) have been stung recently after selling off old school land that they had no right to, as it was handed over under the condition it was for education, and when that stopped it reverted to the donor.

Learns new trick

Is in awe of IT monkeys