The Green Party

[TinFoilHat]

Imagine Labour/conservatives/reform had announced a leader who had:


- From a wealthy family
-Private Education (and kicked out for bad behaviour)
-Name change
-Actor
-Numerous run-ins with the law
-Worked for a private health clinic offering very questionable and creepy hypnotherapy
-Got the huff with a previous party cos he didn't get enough votes in a by-election so jumped to a new one.


Those who'll vote for Polanski would be spewing, but they'll vote for him!


Nothing but a Snake oil salesman.

From a wealthy family
Private education
Wanted to learn Hitler youth songs
Investment banker cosplaying being working class
Funded by billionaires with links to Putin
Bessie mates with convicted sex offenders Donald Trump and Andrew Tate
Runs away anytime theres a loss

Nothing but a snake oil salesman

That is the leader of Reform party.

 

[jacko74]

They never said they're in favour of mass immigration though, they're just pro-immigration.

They're actually in favour of being a part of the EU again which meant lower immigration and generally immigration of higher skilled workers from the EU to the UK.

In general though the country needs migration to make up for labour shortages in certain sectors.

Oh dear that old chestnut... where to begin....

We don't have shortages in any sectors, we do have a huge issue of under-employment though, with vast numbers of working age people choosing to work minimal part time hours in order to receive optimum "in work" benefits.

Just ask anyone who is actually looking for permanent, full-time, low skilled work, especially young people and they'll tell you how incredibly difficult it is to find such a job.

The narrative of "We Need Immigration to Fill Job Vacancies" is one of the greatest lies ever told by our billionaire corporate rulers.

The Greens have claimed we don't have mass immigration, ergo they're in favour of the immigration levels we currently have as they don't recognise it as being "mass" immigration.

 

[Don Karleone]

Labour needs to get out of the way.

 

[Postman Pep]

Labour needs to get out of the way.

Reform enablers ;-)

 

[hilts]

Labour needs to get out of the way.

How good would that be, fucking fake socialist bastards that they are.

 

[hilts]

Reform enablers ;-)

Haha

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

Reform enablers ;-)

What you talking about, I’m thinking about voting Reform to confirm how those on the extreme left have just fucked themselves over.

I cannot stand Reform, and the thought of the Putin/Trump ball-cupping Farage being in charge of this country scares me to fucking death, but if we’re going that way, let’s embrace it and see what they can do with your hard earned money.

 

[Tiattos_Waterbottle]

Yes he's very impressive hopefully he'll put breast enlarging hypnotherapy on the NHS.

Literally all the right has on him, and even then it's actually bullshit.

Why is it when The Sun slags City off, it's bullshit but when they agree with your worldview, it's gospel? Food for thought.

 

[jacko74]

Literally all the right has on him, and even then it's actually bullshit.

Why is it when The Sun slags City off, it's bullshit but when they agree with your worldview, it's gospel? Food for thought.

Its far from the only thing and is actually the most trivial of his negative points, but you've got to admit it is the most comical.

What is more concerning is that he's a wealthy champagne Marxist who's demonstrated that he's just yet another Useful Idiot of the ruling billionaire establishment he claims to despise so much.

I'd be the first to vote for the "Green" party if they had any green credentials at all, sadly now they've been taken over by Marxist Useful Idiots any commitment to genuine environmentalism is long gone.

 

[hilts]

Its far from the only thing and is actually the most trivial of his negative points, but you've got to admit it is the most comical.

What is more concerning is that he's a wealthy champagne Marxist who's demonstrated that he's just yet another Useful Idiot of the ruling billionaire establishment he claims to despise so much.

I'd be the first to vote for the "Green" party if they had any green credentials at all, sadly now they've been taken over by Marxist Useful Idiots any commitment to genuine environmentalism is long gone.

Im not sure how you are coming to that conclusion tbh, helping the establishment? No green credentials at all?

 

[jacko74]

Im not sure how you are coming to that conclusion tbh, helping the establishment? No green credentials at all?

He's in favour of mass immigration and has already branded anyone opposed to mass immigration as being "racists".

I'm sure I don't need to explain to someone as well informed as yourself that the only reason we have mass immigration into this country is because its so profitable for the exploitative globalist corporations and parasitic rentier class establishment.

Anyone who supports mass immigration is supporting the billionaire establishment.

His support for mass immigration also automatically proves he has no green credentials whatsoever... in what way is being in favour of an ever expanding population, which requires ever more living space, ever more development of infrastructure, ever more use of natural resources.. in any way conducive with saving and protecting the environment?

 

[Tiattos_Waterbottle]

Its far from the only thing and is actually the most trivial of his negative points, but you've got to admit it is the most comical.

What is more concerning is that he's a wealthy champagne Marxist who's demonstrated that he's just yet another Useful Idiot of the ruling billionaire establishment he claims to despise so much.

I'd be the first to vote for the "Green" party if they had any green credentials at all, sadly now they've been taken over by Marxist Useful Idiots any commitment to genuine environmentalism is long gone.

Nope, it's literally the only thing, the rest is the opinions of MPs and useful idiots who vote for them who are shit scared of his growing influence. Why don't you answer what I asked, are The Sun suddenly a font of truth because they agree with you?

'Wealthy champagne marxist' - He's from fucking Salford, he grew up in Salford, not in a posh area of London or leafy part of Essex. - And aside from that, redistribution of wealth isn't marxist anyway, most of his policies are fairly light socialism at that.

Would you fuck, If you gave a fuck about the green causes you'd vote anyone other than the current shower on either side of the house.

 

[Tiattos_Waterbottle]

He's in favour of mass immigration and has already branded anyone opposed to mass immigration as being "racists".

I'm sure I don't need to explain to someone as well informed as yourself that the only reason we have mass immigration into this country is because its so profitable for the exploitative globalist corporations and parasitic rentier class establishment.

Anyone who supports mass immigration is supporting the billionaire establishment.

His support for mass immigration also automatically proves he has no green credentials whatsoever... in what way is being in favour of an ever expanding population, which requires ever more living space, ever more development of infrastructure, ever more use of natural resources.. in any way conducive with saving and protecting the environment?

Lmao, single issue voter again. Go paint a fucking roundabout.

 

[BrianW]

Oh dear that old chestnut... where to begin....

We don't have shortages in any sectors, we do have a huge issue of under-employment though, with vast numbers of working age people choosing to work minimal part time hours in order to receive optimum "in work" benefits.

Clearly, we do have shortages in some sectors, or it would be easy to find a dentist, to give but one example. Plumbers would not be able to charge ludicrous prices if there were not a shortage of plumbers. And so on.

Now, you could take Dave from the council estate, with his one GCSE and his drug habit, and train him up to be a dentist, but it would take an enormous input of resources to bring about such a transformation. Are you willing to pay (a lot) more tax to pay for the Daves of this world to be retrained - and in many cases, pulled out of their drug habit? If not, it's just a fantasy.

As to the under-employed, blame the plutocratic capitalists, happy to pay themselves multi-millions in salaries and dividends but also happy to pay their staff starvation wages so that the state (that is us) has to subsidise their existence with Universal Credit and Housing Benefit. And while you're at it, blame the chronic undersupply of houses, which results in obscene prices and ludicrous rents. (The housing market is the perfect illustration of how markets do not work.)

 

[threespires]

He's in favour of mass immigration and has already branded anyone opposed to mass immigration as being "racists".

I'm sure I don't need to explain to someone as well informed as yourself that the only reason we have mass immigration into this country is because its so profitable for the exploitative globalist corporations and parasitic rentier class establishment.

Anyone who supports mass immigration is supporting the billionaire establishment.

His support for mass immigration also automatically proves he has no green credentials whatsoever... in what way is being in favour of an ever expanding population, which requires ever more living space, ever more development of infrastructure, ever more use of natural resources.. in any way conducive with saving and protecting the environment?

I understand your frustration with the subsidies that big corporations receive but I think your solution has some fundamental flaws because you're trying to fix it from the wrong end.

Let's hypothetically heavily reduce immigration, I don't think the corporate response to that will be to offer better t&c's to attract existing British people into the jobs. It will be to offer those same jobs on the same t&c's and where that doesn't attract a sufficient workforce then to reduce service levels and/or seek to increase technological support to reduce labour costs. You're right that too many big businesses and sectors are hooked on cheap labour but that's not a function of immigration it's a function of corporate greed.

In order to make those jobs respectably paid and to put into place the training programmes needed to transition the under employed into them requires significant investment. This will require a government compelling them to do so or changing the tax regime to facilitate the investment. So unless you're comfortable with the native population being exploited in the same way many immigrants are (which I don't think you are as your beef seems to be with the corporations?), then the only way to address this is by tackling the corporations themselves. There's no evidence to suggest that choking off labour supply and hoping the market adjusts itself in favour of the workforce will work. Evidence suggests the market will adapt in yet more dysfunctional ways.

My final point would be that economically immigration isn't a zero sum game anyway, the pie isn't fixed. However I think that's a bit academic to this discussion. If you want to fix the corporatism/extreme wealth problem you have to deal with the head of the snake not the tail.

 

[hilts]

He's in favour of mass immigration and has already branded anyone opposed to mass immigration as being "racists".

I'm sure I don't need to explain to someone as well informed as yourself that the only reason we have mass immigration into this country is because its so profitable for the exploitative globalist corporations and parasitic rentier class establishment.

Anyone who supports mass immigration is supporting the billionaire establishment.

His support for mass immigration also automatically proves he has no green credentials whatsoever... in what way is being in favour of an ever expanding population, which requires ever more living space, ever more development of infrastructure, ever more use of natural resources.. in any way conducive with saving and protecting the environment?

Im not sure mass migration is the correct term or inflating his views somewhat, anyhow as someone who isn't in favour of immigration its something I disagree with the party on. They have unfortunately fallen for the optics of the situation. They fear the labelling it would cause. You see it on here, you are either in favour of large immigration or are right wing. Its the weakness in people. They have been hoodwinked into taking that simplistic stance, obviously some are just actually simple themselves.

They are still the strongest party by far on the environment and that for me tops everything so they get my vote. The attacks on him are par for the course, every politician gets it, some is valid some is just agenda driven.

 

[law74]

Labour needs to get out of the way.

I wouldn't put much bearing on polls this far from a general election, IF Farage is still in with a chance of getting Number Ten (& I don't believe he will be), tactical voting will be off the scale to keep him out.

 

[jacko74]

I understand your frustration with the subsidies that big corporations receive but I think your solution has some fundamental flaws because you're trying to fix it from the wrong end.

Let's hypothetically heavily reduce immigration, I don't think the corporate response to that will be to offer better t&c's to attract existing British people into the jobs. It will be to offer those same jobs on the same t&c's and where that doesn't attract a sufficient workforce then to reduce service levels and/or seek to increase technological support to reduce labour costs. You're right that too many big businesses and sectors are hooked on cheap labour but that's not a function of immigration it's a function of corporate greed.

In order to make those jobs respectably paid and to put into place the training programmes needed to transition the under employed into them requires significant investment. This will require a government compelling them to do so or changing the tax regime to facilitate the investment. So unless you're comfortable with the native population being exploited in the same way many immigrants are (which I don't think you are as your beef seems to be with the corporations?), then the only way to address this is by tackling the corporations themselves. There's no evidence to suggest that choking off labour supply and hoping the market adjusts itself in favour of the workforce will work. Evidence suggests the market will adapt in yet more dysfunctional ways.

My final point would be that economically immigration isn't a zero sum game anyway, the pie isn't fixed. However I think that's a bit academic to this discussion. If you want to fix the corporatism/extreme wealth problem you have to deal with the head of the snake not the tail.

You're just coming at it entirely from entirely the wrong angle, of course corporate greed lies at the heart of the issue, but it's mass immigration that has allowed that corporate greed and obscene wealth accumulation to increase vastly over the course of the last two decades.

Without the huge supply of cheap labour available through mass immigration the historically unprecedented stagnation and suppression of wages we've experienced in the last two decades simply couldn't have occurred, the same applies to the erosion of workers rights and T&C's.

It's really basic and immutable economics of supply and demand in terms of the value of labour, something that has existed since even long before Capitalism.

There's no evidence at all to suggest that removing that cheap labour the corporations will respond by effectively downsizing and reducing their output and the services they provide, that's a complete anathema to the way modern day corporatism operates and would leave them vulnerable to market competition for one thing.

In the face of cutting off their cheap labour supply the corporations could possibly attempt to limit their labour costs and maintain their obscene profit margins by going down the route of technological innovation... but why is that a bad thing?

It's very unlikely technological innovation could entirely counteract the exploitative use of millions of migrant labourers anyway so in some circumstances where technological innovation isn't an option the corporations would simply have no choice but to increase their pay levels.

There are other interlinked aspects to the whole situation of rampant corporatism and cheap labour, chiefly the utter insanity of a situation whereby we're importing millions of unskilled low paid workers whilst at the same time we have millions of working age people all under-employed through choice, CHOOSING to work minimal part time hours in order to receive optimum "in work" benefits even when permanent full-time hours are available to them... again all ultimately for the benefit of the corporations.

Your snake analogy works both ways, the way to deal with the head of that avaricious corporate snake is to remove its body.. in this case the snake's body is represented by the mass immigration that snake is exploiting and benefiting from so much.

 

[jacko74]

Clearly, we do have shortages in some sectors, or it would be easy to find a dentist, to give but one example. Plumbers would not be able to charge ludicrous prices if there were not a shortage of plumbers. And so on.

Now, you could take Dave from the council estate, with his one GCSE and his drug habit, and train him up to be a dentist, but it would take an enormous input of resources to bring about such a transformation. Are you willing to pay (a lot) more tax to pay for the Daves of this world to be retrained - and in many cases, pulled out of their drug habit? If not, it's just a fantasy.

As to the under-employed, blame the plutocratic capitalists, happy to pay themselves multi-millions in salaries and dividends but also happy to pay their staff starvation wages so that the state (that is us) has to subsidise their existence with Universal Credit and Housing Benefit. And while you're at it, blame the chronic undersupply of houses, which results in obscene prices and ludicrous rents. (The housing market is the perfect illustration of how markets do not work.)

The shortage of skilled dentists, surgeons or engineers certainly doesn't require immigration levels at even 10% of what we're currently seeing to fill any vacancies in those sectors.

You're obviously quite comfortable for the UK to appropriate those educated and skilled people from countries much poorer than the UK... poor, developing countries that have paid to educate and train those people and who are in far more need of their skills than we here in the UK are.

That seems to me to be every bit as deplorable and abhorrent as the very worst acts Colonial theft and appropriation seen during the times of Empire, but fair enough if you have no moral and ethical qualms over such behaviour.

The vast majority of immigrants have skills and education levels that fall well below what Dave from the council estate with his one gcse has achieved in his life and those immigrants are doing jobs that Dave is well capable of doing.

Yes I very much do blame the corporate plutocrats for the situation of starvation wages being very heavily subsidised with tax payers money.. but again the overriding reason that enables them to get away with paying starvation wages in the first place is the oversupply of cheap immigrant labour they're able to utilise.

And as to your final point on the obscene cost of accommodation, perhaps that undersupply of housing wouldn't be quite so chronic if we didn't have three quarters of a million people pouring into the country each year all requiring a roof over their head?

 

[jacko74]

Lmao, single issue voter again. Go paint a fucking roundabout.

What an invaluable contribution to the discussion, your intelligence and powers of debating ability are shining through for all to see.

Please enlighten us as to what is more important than the "single issue" of the huge reduction in standards of living that ordinary people have endured over the last two decades, entirely due to the suppression of wages and the inflation of accommodation costs?