Very good Alf, but for me this thread is good confrontation of different views, beliefs and ideas, which for me is a good read.
Nice one Alfie.
Now FLB more reasons why the Greens are nuts.
Abolition of border controls.
ClassA n B drugs to be allowed in possession.
Less prison sentences.
Prisioners to get the vote (No way)
I rest my case.
Very good Alf, but for me this thread is good confrontation of different views, beliefs and ideas, which for me is a good read.
One of the good things about the Green Party is their stance on retired greyhounds .. - view external link
The Greens deserve their say as do the the so called radical thinking groups in Britain
An email arrives from the excellent Zoe Williams, Guardian columnist and leftyagitfem middle-class propagandist. It requests that I should sign a round-robin petition to ensure that the Green Party is included in these proposed TV general election debates – much as David Cameron has, rather disingenuously, demanded.
I couldn’t sign the petition. I can’t think of a reason why the Greens should be excluded from the debates if, say, Ukip is to be there as well. The Greens’ current opinion poll standings put them level with the hapless Lib Dems. They have an MP. They should probably be in there, somewhere – even if they lose their sole MP come May, Inshallah.
But I couldn’t sign the petition because I can’t stand them. I realise that this is an inadequate reason, devoid of principle. And worse because I have, in the past, voted for them. For stupid reasons, I now suspect. But you look at Brighton and
Actually zero growth is nothing new. The Club of Rome in the 60s forecast a bleak future for the human race if it did not curb population growth and it's demand on Planet Earth for it's resources. Our appetite might always be increasing but the Earth is always the same size as it's always been and always will be. Zero growth was a part of the Liberal party manifesto in the 70s but the electorate rejected it. Unless the human race accepts that it must eventually live off renewables then it will be eventually be excluded as where the dinosaurs.Economics is the scienceOriginally Posted by claw84
Increasing council tax: more gesture politics from the Green Party
July 4, 2014 by Neil Schofield
After the farce, the tragedy. Following several days dominated by the furore caused by Green Cllr Ben Duncan’s tweet describing the armed forces as “hired killers”, and the discovery of an equally offensive Islamophobic tweet, the Brighton and Hove Green Party has today announced that it will seek a 5.9% Council Tax increase next year, claiming that this is needed to plug the shortfall left by Government cuts.
Apparently, some people never learn.
The City has already been down this route this year, when the Greens proposed a more modest tax increase of 4.75%. The arguments against that increase haven’t changed: it won’t plug the gap, it will increase uncertainty, it will involve an expensive referendum that the Greens won’t win, and above all it will mean a substantial increase in Council Tax – £100 per year – hitting some of the most vulnerable people in the city hardest at a time w
The Guardian
Tuesday 27 January 2015 20.05 GMT
The Green party’s flagship economic policy, the £72 a week “citizen’s income”, would hit the poorest hardest unless it was made more complicated by including a means-tested element, the leading advocate of the policy has conceded.
The Citizen’s Income Trust (CIT), which has given advice to the Green party and been repeatedly cited by the Greens, has modelled its scheme and discovered it would mean 35.15% of households would be losers, with many of the biggest losers among the poorest households.
The trust’s research shows that for the two lowest disposable income deciles, more than one-fifth would suffer income losses of more than 10%, something one of the most leftwing parties in the election is unlikely to want to advocate.
Malcolm Torry, director of the CIT, a small charitable research body, said: “I am not sure the Green party has yet taken on our new research or the need to retain a means-tested element. We have only just publish