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

Aside from the completely nutty policies, of which there are legion, how the F are they going to fund all that when they've managed the economy into negative growth?...............

[i]What's interesting, is that people who aren't lefty tree-hugging vegans are also considering voting for them[/i]

Yeah right! Come the moment of putting their X in the box......they'll come to their senses!

What's interesting, is that people who aren't lefty tree-hugging vegans are also considering voting for them.

Some of us are considering standing for them.

They don't seem to even realise that the CURRENT marginal rate of tax at £100K to £120K is 62%.

was it when they wrote their 2010 manifesto?

Some of us are considering standing for them.

I'm looking forward to Mike "Supporting local communities to choose their own transition path, to become more self-reliant, reflecting local history, ecological profile and needs."

I assume it means that n+1 no longer applies and we are all going to be using Cargo bikes 😉

In sandals?

Sadly, I don't own any sandals.

I assume it means that n+1 no longer applies and we are all going to be using Cargo bikes

I sold my cargo bike 🙂

In many ways I admire their forward thinking and brave policies, and may vote for the Green candidate in my local constituency simply because I would have voted Lib Dem in the past.

However, until they decide to ditch the truly mad policies like homeopathy on the NHS and the banning of water fluoridation they cannot be taken seriously.

[quote="Flaperon"]However, until they decide to ditch the truly mad policies like homeopathy on the NHS and the banning of water fluoridation they cannot be taken seriously.
Yet despite various (illegal/immoral) wars/incursions and expenses scandals the general public continue to take the status quo seriously...

until they decide to ditch the truly mad policies like homeopathy on the NHS and the banning of water fluoridation they cannot be taken seriously.

I suspect that more out there policies will disappear from their manifesto as they grow in membership.

we are all going to be using Cargo bikes

we can only hope

It's funny watching the right of centre folk get in a tizzy..

Like spoilt kids who've been told they can't have any sweets cos they've been naughty 😆

If you are trying to achieve something and you fail with a given method, you try an alternative one, right?

What's failed? Capitalism? That thing that took Europe out of the dark ages, into an age of food security, better health, clean water and better education?

Oh but, because the planets climate might change a little bit - nothing that adaptable humans cannot cope with, suddenly the sky is falling down on everything we stand for and we now need to cast around for some wild new idea that may or may not work.

"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"

Based on what I have read they won't get my vote.

I can't be bothered to plough through that lot but

a) Why the hell would fee paying schools paying tax cause the destruction of the country? Are you somehow insisting fee paying schools produce all the clever people? Because **** off

b) Managed decline wouldn't lead to job losses. Unmanaged decline would. The clue is in the 'managed' part. How do they do that? I don't know.. but the current government are just threatening to fire people willy nilly so I can't imagine it'd be much worse than that.

It certainly wouldn't help me

So because it doens't help you, it can't help anyone? That right? 🙄

molgrips - Member

a) Why the hell would fee paying schools paying tax cause the destruction of the country?

In the same way that demanding other profitmaking companies pay tax has caused the destruction of all companies.

b) Managed decline wouldn't lead to job losses. Unmanaged decline would. The clue is in the 'managed' part. How do they do that? I don't know.. but the current government are just threatening to fire people willy nilly so I can't imagine it'd be much worse than that.

If you aimed to have no job losses, it means growth and job creation would have to follow the rate of population decline, which means it would take centuries at the current immigration and birth rate. And even longer with their proposed immigration policies.

Not that I am against immigration, it's just the greens are morons.

[quote="CountZero"]Yeah, right.
Show me how that little utopia is gonna work, then.
It certainly wouldn't help me, considering the strict security I have to work under, which is, in fact, dictated by the third sector which is our client base.
One of those third sector clients who we've been working hard to win came round today to check how tight all our security precautions are, which include any visitor being chaperoned by a member of staff should they need to go to the loo, or other part of the building.
Our company is directly involved in the raising of tens, hundreds of millions of pounds for these clients, just how that could be managed by home-based or part-time workers I'm not sure. (Having said that, we do use a fair number of agency staff, essentially because the volume of work varies dramatically through the course of the year).

I... but... <sigh> 🙁

it means growth and job creation would have to follow the rate of population decline,

No, it means we'd all work less or for less money. Deflation.

It'd be a trick if they could pull it off, mind. Simply allowing job loss is no kind of management at all, thereby not meeting their policy objectives.

They want to shrink the economy ie reduce consumption, without increasing joblessness. Afaik that's what's been happening the last few years anyway - jobless down, economy flat.

Why the hell would fee paying schools paying tax cause the destruction of the country?

funnily enough someone on the radio this morning commented that the reduction in people taking private health insurance in the recession had increased the pressure on the NHS

Are you somehow insisting fee paying schools produce all the clever people?

my wife insists she is cleverer than me 😉

No, it means we'd all work less or for less money. Deflation.

Good point, although I don't see how they could manage this long term without risking a significant recession at some point and redundancies in the private sector.

At the end of the day, Asia won't go down this route and neither will the US. We would just see a brain drain of the best and brightest leave the country to earn a lot more elsewhere.

Most people don't give a shit about the planet even when educated properly, so you have to frame environmental issues within a paradigm that takes this into account. Whenever I think about this, I can only see further technological development as the way round our problems. Other ideas are simply a waste of brain power as human society as a whole will never be co-opted to follow them.

it won't. It will just put more pressure on the state sector as people stop paying the fee's and schools close.

Corporation tax is paid on profit, no? So all that would happen is that those profiting would make less profit..? Encouraging investment back into the school rather than money making?

Flaperon - Member

truly mad policies like homeopathy on the NHS

Caroline Bennett: "I absolutely do not believe that homeopathy works as they describe it. However, what I do believe in is the placebo effect… The way I think homeopathy 'works' is as a placebo. And I think there is a very small and limited place on the NHS for homeopathy…"

Which makes them, er, as mad as the current government. Homeopathy on the NHS eh?

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/homeopathy/Pages/Introduction.aspx#available

Who here expects all election manifestos from the "mainstream" parties to be fulfilled in their entirety?

Would it not therefore be reasonable to assume the Greens will become somewhat more moderate or gentle in implementing the more contentious issues some of you assume will blow the economy out of the water?

Also as the Greens become somewhat more mainstream, surely there will be a loss of the more "loopy" characters, and perhaps a move to re-assess some of the more, unscientific, influence that the genuine sandal-wearing, motorway tunnelling [i]actual[/i] tree hugging crusties used to express?

IMHO, it'd be a bit of a shame, but this seems likely to me.

Final point:
[img] [/img]

I don't get it. Why is earning more money better?

I don't get it. Why is earning more money better?

You might not get it, but it's the reason why there are vast amounts of immigrants in this country.

[img] [/img]

Let's have a further-educated debate 🙂

What's failed? Capitalism? That thing that took Europe out of the dark ages

Ahh yes, the 13th century, that great paragon of unfettered global capitalism.

Ahh yes, the 13th century, that great paragon of unfettered global capitalism.

You're assuming the 18th century was different to the 13th.

Doing the rounds at the mo..

Woman Realizes Her Customers Are Drunk And Unemployed.
Her Solution Is Genius

Mary is the proprietor of a bar in Dublin. She realizes that virtually all of her customers are unemployed alcoholics and, as such, can no longer afford to patronise her bar.
To solve this problem, she comes up with a new marketing plan that allows her customers to drink now, but pay later. She keeps track of the drinks consumed on a ledger (thereby granting the customers loans).

Word gets around about Mary’s “drink now, pay later” marketing strategy and, as a result, increasing numbers of customers flood into Mary’s bar. Soon she has the largest sales volume for any bar in Dublin.

By providing her customers freedom from immediate payment demands, Mary gets no resistance when, at regular intervals, she substantially increases her prices for wine and beer, the most consumed beverages. Consequently, Mary’s gross sales volume increases massively. A young and dynamic vice-president at the local bank recognizes that these customer debts constitute valuable future assets and increases Mary’s borrowing limit. He sees no reason for any undue concern, since he has the debts of the unemployed alcoholics as collateral.

At the bank’s corporate headquarters, expert traders figure a way to make huge commissions, and transform these customer loans into DRINKBONDS, ALKIBONDS and PUKEBONDS. These securities are then bundled and traded on international security markets. Naive investors don’t really understand that the securities being sold to them as AAA secured bonds are really the debts of unemployed alcoholics. Nevertheless, the bond prices continuously climb, and the securities soon become the hottest-selling items for some of the nation’s leading brokerage houses.

One day, even though the bond prices are still climbing, a risk manager at the original local bank decides that the time has come to demand payment on the debts incurred by the drinkers at Mary’s bar. He so informs Mary.

Mary then demands payment from her alcoholic patrons, but being unemployed alcoholics they cannot pay back their drinking debts. Since Mary cannot fulfill her loan obligations she is forced into bankruptcy. The bar closes and the eleven employees lose their jobs.

Overnight, DRINKBONDS, ALKIBONDS and PUKEBONDS drop in price by 90%. The collapsed bond asset value destroys the banks’ liquidity and prevents it from issuing new loans, thus freezing credit and economic activity in the community.

The suppliers of Mary’s bar had granted her generous payment extensions and had invested their firms’ pension funds in the various BOND securities. They find they are now faced with having to write off her bad debt and with losing over 90% of the presumed value of the bonds. Her wine supplier also claims bankruptcy, closing the doors on a family business that had endured for three generations, her beer supplier is taken over by a competitor, who immediately closes the local plant and lays off 150 workers.

Fortunately though, the bank, the brokerage houses and their respective executives are saved and bailed out by a multi-billion euro no-strings attached cash infusion from their cronies in Government. The funds required for this bailout are obtained by new taxes levied on employed, middle-class, non-drinkers who have never been in Mary’s bar.

Now, do you understand economics in 2015?

Wow... Every day a school day.... Is that off Facebook?? 😉

Anyone who thinks that the Greens' manifesto is bonkers should go and have a read of the mainstream parties' manifestos.

NW speaks much sense on this thread

it won't. It will just put more pressure on the state sector as people stop paying the fee's and schools close.

funnily enough someone on the radio this morning commented that the reduction in people taking private health insurance in the recession had increased the pressure on the NHS

Possible but untested and worthy of research

binners - Member
Nope. Sorry. Still not getting the whole centralisation thing at all there Wopster.

I'll give you that one, binners.

I was ALMOST swayed by the "**** it, let's just give them a go" argument, but...

I just can't support the high tax and spend (a lot of which will be thrown at useless wiffle like windmills that won't provide our energy needs) and the profound anti-technology stuff.

I'm all for nuclear power, fracking, and GM foods. Also, animal testing, until there's something better.

There's something profoundly Luddite at the core of the Green Party, so I think I'll pass.

As far as the economy, I'll stick with Osborne. The alternatives are too horrible to contemplate.

I'll stick with Osborne. The alternatives are too horrible to contemplate

Our political system has come to this.

WTF.

Balls.

As far as the economy, I'll stick with Osborne. The alternatives are too horrible to contemplate.

And is there a more profound example of the bankruptcy of our present economic and political system than that?

The Chicago School model of capitalism has nearly destroyed the economy. The solution? More of the same. But even more extreme this time. What could possibly go wrong?

And in the face of the abject failure of this model of neoliberal economics, nobody is proposing any alternative at all.

Oh.... apart from the Greens.

The Chicago School model of capitalism has nearly destroyed the economy

Odd. I hadn't noticed that anybody was trying it. As was mentioned by someone else, even the Conservatives, who claim to champion Free Marker Capitalism, are actually in thrall to corporatism, shored up by the taxpayer when failing.

However, under Osborne, the economy IS growing at last, and the country's debts reducing. If he achieves his aim of a surplus, the next decision will be how much to spend, and what on.

Agreed Wopster. The bank bailouts, and subsequent QE couldn't have been more socialist unless they'd have quoted tractor production figures while doing it.

That doesn't change the fact that all thats being proposed is more of the same. So lets have a look shall we

1. Unsustainable property bubble? Tick
2. Economic recovery* based on credit fuelled consumer spending on imported goods? Tick
3. An unreformed, and over-powerful banking sector, still 'too big to fail' serving its own interests, with barely a consideration for the 'real' economy? Tick

Like I said.... what could possibly go wrong? Its hardly surprising if a lot of people have had enough, and think its about time we gave something else a go

* The word is used figuratively in this instance

However, under Osborne, the economy IS growing at last, and the country's debts reducing. If he achieves his aim of a surplus, the next decision will be how much to spend, and what on.

You mean that the interest on the country's debt is being paid back?

Well I agree that there seems to be a head of "let's just give something else a go" building up, but I don't think that's a good enough basis on which to vote. Especially in the case of the Greens, who just sound like a bunch of hopeless meddlers to me.

In an ideal world (hah!) we'd all get exactly what each of us wanted but as I hope we've all noticed by now, life ain't like that.

Arranging for the economy to be run on Friedman's or even Schumpeter's ideas would meet so much resistance from entrenched corporate interests (to which any Government has to pander if it is to survive) that it would take a revolution as profound and probably bloody as the failed attempts at socialism/communism that the planet suffered in the last century, that nobody is willing to risk it. Hence the "semi-free market" model that Osborne is following.

I'd like to see us let the free market rip and make some real progress, but in the meantime, I'll just go with it's nearest copy which in 2015 in the UK is....

let's not forget that Osborne's economic recovery is also heavily dependent upon an interest rate of 0.5%.

how many people would be financially buggered if interest rates soared to the lofty heights of ... say ... a staggering 3%?

ie. it's not really a recovery at all.

Mr Woppit - Member

Well I agree that there seems to be a head of "let's just give something else a go" building up, but I don't think that's a good enough basis on which to vote. Especially in the case of the Greens...

Ffs. no-one who is thinking of voting for the greens actually thinks they're going to win much if anything.

for many, it's simply seen as an effective way of telling the other left-sympathetic parties that there are votes in environmental and social policies.

and, that broadly speaking, one wouldn't mind a bit more tax if spending was increased on groovy things like social care, education, public transport, schools, environmental protection, etc.