Does anybody here take the Greens seriously?

[First Aspect]

Their policies are broadly the same. Polanski is pretty clear - he has hijacked aspects of the populist playbook because he is media savvy; he knowns this is the only way to cut through. Now the GPEW have about 2 million members, have tripled their vote share. The gap is closing between them and Reform currently because the Reform vote is falling. Greens are up about 10%, Reform have dropped about 10%.

Where is your criticism that Reform have no real policies, just shouty messages designed to inculcate fear? Even the most superficial study of what Reform exist for should cause concern in a thinking person.

Yougov's polling shows that the real battle is no longer a class war, it is between people who work, and people who are collecting pension.

The workforce wants a better deal. Reform are not the answer to this.

Reform are much much worse. I don't think the choice is binary.

On your last point, if that's where the political battle lies, it is a populist one, because that's not where many of the problems lie.

 

[Psamathe]

Worth noting (as I previously pointed out) how and what Green Party "policy" is.
Polanski does not decide Green Party policy. He might express views on subjects but he does not decided Party policy.
Green Party policy is set by the membership who can introduce policies to be voted on at conference.
Manifesto and Political Program are taken from policies decided (and voted on) at Conference.

 

[First Aspect]

Worth noting (as I previously pointed out) how and what Green Party "policy" is.
Polanski does not decide Green Party policy. He might express views on subjects but he does not decided Party policy.
Green Party policy is set by the membership who can introduce policies to be voted on at conference.
Manifesto and Political Program are taken from policies decided (and voted on) at Conference.

So he can just spout any old crap? Great.

 

[Psamathe]

So he can just spout any old crap? Great.

He can and he does, just as Färage can and does, as Badenoch can and does, as Starmer can and does, etc.

 

[First Aspect]

He can and he does, just as Färage can and does, as Badenoch can and does, as Starmer can and does, etc.

Disagree with the last one. That is why he's unpopular.

 

[icowden]

Disagree with the last one. That is why he's unpopular.

Disagree with your assessment of why Starmer is unpopular. It's completely unrelated and to do with weak leadership and constant u-turns and knee jerk reactions coupled with the fact that he didn't win the election because people wanted him.

 

[BoldonLad]

Singling out a medical intervention that affects only women seems bold.

View attachment 13363

did he hypnotise men too?, I didn't know that 😊,

I agree, a risky strategy for a man to comment on childbirth issues.

 

[monkers]

Reform are much much worse. I don't think the choice is binary.

On your last point, if that's where the political battle lies, it is a populist one, because that's not where many of the problems lie.

Central to the division is the wealth gap - people are becoming increasingly aware of the reason because they are feeling it, and because the explanations from multiple sources are telling them - all being amplified by Polanski.

We need to become less dependent on models of growth and more focused profits of keeping profits within the economy rather than languishing in offshore accounts in tax havens.

 

[First Aspect]

Central to the division is the wealth gap - people are becoming increasingly aware of the reason because they are feeling it, and because the explanations from multiple sources are telling them - all being amplified by Polanski.

We need to become less dependent on models of growth and more focused profits of keeping profits within the economy rather than languishing in offshore accounts in tax havens.

Most people think the wealth gap is somewhere other than it is. For starters it seems to be associated with salary, not wealth. And there's this misconception that wealth means there's money sloshing around a family, which as discussed above often isn't the case.

 

[BoldonLad]

Most people think the wealth gap is somewhere other than it is. For starters it seems to be associated with salary, not wealth. And there's this misconception that wealth means there's money sloshing around a family, which as discussed above often isn't the case.

100% agree.

 

[monkers]

Most people think the wealth gap is somewhere other than it is. For starters it seems to be associated with salary, not wealth. And there's this misconception that wealth means there's money sloshing around a family, which as discussed above often isn't the case.

The top 1% have more wealth than the bottom 70% combined. That gives you a good measure of where it is - and that situation is said to be worsening. Child poverty and pensioner poverty rates are increasing.

Despite this, an extrapolation of Yougov data shows that if only men over the age of 65 were to vote, they'd be 480 Reform MPs in parliament. They'd be only 2 Green MPs.

This is the reverse of if only women age 18 to 49 were to vote - they'd vote Green.

 

[First Aspect]

The top 1% have more wealth than the bottom 70% combined. That gives you a good measure of where it is - and that situation is said to be worsening. Child poverty and pensioner poverty rates are increasing.

Despite this, an extrapolation of Yougov data shows that if only men over the age of 65 were to vote, they'd be 480 Reform MPs in parliament. They'd be only 2 Green MPs.

This is the reverse of if only women age 18 to 49 were to vote - they'd vote Green.

Sure, providing you are talking about wealth not income. But the data always skews when there's no upper limit. Even in the top 1% there is a top 1%.

It is also quite easy to be in the top, say 20% of income and top 1% of wealth and vice versa.

 

[CXRAndy]

Top 1% pay 30% of the tax, so given they have a higher burden they should have more votes than the rest of society

 

[classic33]

Top 1% pay 30% of the tax, so given they have a higher burden they should have more votes than the rest of society

Most systems are one person one vote.
But proving that those top 1% have actually paid the tax they're liable for is another matter.

 

[CXRAndy]

"Every man is entitled, if he can, to arrange his affairs so that the tax attaching under the appropriate Acts is less than it otherwise would be."