CWU & The Green Party ?

[Tman]

Green party would like a sustainable viable public transport system. That is essential for reducing car usage.

Yeah, nice idea, but unlike 50 years ago where people generally lived and worked within a five mile commute and buses etc were suitable, now they don't, and the buses and trains are a lot less frequent.
So who's going to stump up for the huge capital investment required in this "sustainable and viable" (eh?) transport system proposed by the Greens?
The private sector won't as there's no money in it, and the public purse is empty.
So just another "nice idea" by a party with no hope or chance of ever being elected or even influencing the party in power.

[randompostman]

The Greens have been ok for Posties over the years with their votes in parliament, but they would still like to be the bosses telling all how to live instead of workers telling them how we want to live and then as our REPRESENTATVES doing as we tell them to do and if not they are recalled and a new representative chosen that will do as instructed. Now this is so simple that many don’t, can’t or won’t understand it but i trust my peers over ANY politician that make collective decisions about how we live as a community instead of the majority telling those entrusted with our decisions how to act on all things. We have a system now where the vast majority are ignored in favour of the few and they call it democracy! Well I don’t call it that, I call it slavery ( the fact that we get to choose our slave masters every four or five years does not and will not change the fact that we are voting masters in that call the shots and make all the important decisions on how we lead our lives.) It is much the same with the CWU where we elect another set of bosses over us that tell us what will happen instead of being people that do what we want and that is just as stupid and wrong. Take your own destiny in your hands instead of giving it to other`s to abuse i say.

[Big Daz]

The Greens have been ok for Posties over the years with their votes in parliament,.

Years ? Last year was the election of the first ever GP MP. There was a GP person in the House of Lords but he died and there has been no replacement.

[randompostman]

The Greens have been ok for Posties over the years with their votes in parliament,.

Years ? Last year was the election of the first ever GP MP. There was a GP person in the House of Lords but he died and there has been no replacement.

Did i mention either the commons or lords? I thought i said PARLIAMENT? My bad because the greens have been in the European "PARLIAMENT" for YEARS and as far as i know resisted the liberalisation of OUR postal markets for years? So yeah i could be wrong but still choose to say YEARS!!!!!!!!! My bad if i am wrong. I take it you don`t like the Greens much with such a low opinion of their attempts at saving our postal services through Europe? Never mind i don`t either.

[Big Daz]

Oh dear, I think there has been a misunderstanding on my part

I assumed you meant UK rather than European

I've been a paid up mbr of the green party for the last three years.

You are quite correct in your information about the Green Party in the European parliament and postal liberalisation.

[Harry_Perkins]

Yeah, nice idea, but unlike 50 years ago where people generally lived and worked within a five mile commute and buses etc were suitable, now they don't, and the buses and trains are a lot less frequent.
So who's going to stump up for the huge capital investment required in this "sustainable and viable" (eh?) transport system proposed by the Greens?
The private sector won't as there's no money in it, and the public purse is empty.

Well, the roads are already massively subsidised to the tune of billions every year. Quite simply, how about taking some of the funding from this and put into public transport? We are only a tiny island. We are simply not suited to the way we're currently setup. That and an increase in the overall tax take, which can of course pay for a number of other infrastructure projects (affordable housing, being top of the list). At the moment the overall tax remains historically low and is low compared to the rest of Europe. Mainly because the place is a semi-tax haven for the rich. Just go to somewhere like Norway to see the difference. It is useful comparison as they are the other North Sea Oil giant. You see what their oil money has been spent on. In this country, for one, it helped stop us going bankrupt when the Tories were trying their daft experiment with monetarism in the early 80s (something they didn't even understand properly!) and then when we managed to recover from that, they used most of it to pay for tax cuts for the rich. And that is why we are where we are. With public services in a rough shape, dominated by finance capital, crumbling infrastructure and a myriad of social problems. That is what 30 years of liberal economics does - so please don't come with the 'who is going to pay for it?' bollocks. We found billions upon billions to prop up the banks, we recently found billions more to protect 'our interests' (read: the banks) in Ireland and we've found billions more for another futile war in the Middle East. Public purse empty my arse. If the banks went into crisis again does anyone really think this government would let them fail? What we have here is Socialism..... for the rich. Privatise the losses in the good times, socialise them in the bad times.

So just another "nice idea" by a party with no hope or chance of ever being elected or even influencing the party in power.

I wouldn't say no hope. They are gaining considerable support from the Lib-Dem collapse and are best placed to end up as the new 3rd party after the next election, albeit in a considerably weaker position than the Lib-Dems. A few MPs, at best. Problem is, Green Parties across Europe don't exactly have a great track record in government anyway. As is perhaps inevitable in coalition, compromise is a quite common. That said, the Green Party here has slightly different roots and has a decent track record in local government, so I'm happy to support them up against Labour right-wingers or Lib-Dems. Why they stand against people like John McDonnell though, is beyond me.

[randompostman]

Oh dear, I think there has been a misunderstanding on my part

I assumed you meant UK rather than European

I've been a paid up mbr of the green party for the last three years.

You are quite correct in your information about the Green Party in the European parliament and postal liberalisation.

Still does not change the fact that a vote for the Greens is just a way of avoiding "our responsibilities to ourselves families and fellow workers by saying ok you can be our slave master for the next four to five years!" If it makes you feel any better i have met her twice and spoken once to Caroline Lucas and she seems ok for a boss but sadly a boss she is and a boss she wants to be.

[BELIAL]

Green party would like a sustainable viable public transport system. That is essential for reducing car usage.

Yeah, nice idea, but unlike 50 years ago where people generally lived and worked within a five mile commute and buses etc were suitable, now they don't, and the buses and trains are a lot less frequent.
So who's going to stump up for the huge capital investment required in this "sustainable and viable" (eh?) transport system proposed by the Greens?
The private sector won't as there's no money in it, and the public purse is empty.
So just another "nice idea" by a party with no hope or chance of ever being elected or even influencing the party in power.

Excellent summation ,now try a little seditious thinking . Or is their only one true way?

[loopz]

Okay, so weve picked their policy to pieces..... although tbh it was more the anti-privatisation side of the Greens i was getting at...

So i'm summasing that Labour are the party that will stand up for us(CWU) by opposing privatisation, and that Labour also have the answers to the all the crazy s**t in The Greens Policies, which is why our political levy goes to them.....

[Big Daz]

CWU in a previous incarnation were a founding union of the Labour Party, to start with Labour did not have individual mbrs just affiliated organisations. There is a battle in Labour between those who favour social democracy and those who prefer Democratic Socialism. The trade unions leadership stand behind the latter. The challenge for Labour is to take its founding values and apply to the reality of the 21st Century in essence Real Labour rather than old Labour or New Labour.

[Big Daz]

http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/22-07 ... -wage.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[loopz]

CWU in a previous incarnation were a founding union of the Labour Party, to start with Labour did not have individual mbrs just affiliated organisations. There is a battle in Labour between those who favour social democracy and those who prefer Democratic Socialism. The trade unions leadership stand behind the latter. The challenge for Labour is to take its founding values and apply to the reality of the 21st Century in essence Real Labour rather than old Labour or New Labour.

But from what i see Labour aint gonna change are they....too frikkin late for us anyway.. Im not the most educated on politics but i do take a little interest and from what i see we are funding a party that opposes our stance and has done it's best to destroy the industry and in the process make a few people plenty of cash.....

i may be over-simplifying, but shouldnt we just say F**K you TPFKAL (ThePartyFormelyKnownAsLabour) thanks for nowt!!!!
what i cant get my head round is when people say my dad always voted Labour....as if they are the same party now.... it seems to be that kind of mentality...

If we dont look for another way then well be stuck in this never ending cycle of corrupt government(s) forever and a day..

Too right....even the silly Green Brighton MP woman couldn't wait to put here foot in her mouth; when asked what should be done about the ever-rising price of petrol with the attendant hardship for the poorer sections of society, her only response was "it's actually not high enough".

The usual crass sentiments from the unelectable tossers...

"it's actually not high enough" - very true.
When I started work forty years ago petrol and diesel was much dearer in real terms than they are today and you didn't get supermarkets transporting food half way across the country from producer to processor then again to packager then again to national distribution depot then to the store.

Anyone who cannot see that we need to end our reliance on fossil fuels is a fool to them selves and is setting their children/grandchidren up for a very difficult life....This should be not only ours but Mankinds priority...The Yanks can put men in space but cant harness enough free energy to stop them raping their own land (Gas Shale), not to mention the others

What the Green party may be saying is, We need to change the way we live if we wanna live.
If wind and solar could provide 30% of our energy needs then so be it, we waste far too much anyway....

Cheers for the link Big Daz and for the record ive been a member of the G reens for 2 years

[Tman]

If wind and solar could provide 30% of our energy needs then so be it, we waste far too much anyway....

So disregarding the facts that solar panels etc have a short life, a high initial cost and contain rare/expensive elements in thier construction, and wind power isn't the answer due to flutuating supplies,also high build costs and environmental impact, where does the other 70% come from?

[fishtank]

If wind and solar could provide 30% of our energy needs then so be it, we waste far too much anyway....

So disregarding the facts that solar panels etc have a short life, a high initial cost and contain rare/expensive elements in thier construction, and wind power isn't the answer due to flutuating supplies,also high build costs and environmental impact, where does the other 70% come from?

I think the point he was trying to make was that we need to cut back on our energy consumption to make that 30% more like 50%...is that really going to happen?
Where is the rest coming from?...probably nuclear to be honest unless there is some major scientific breakthrough regarding bio-fuel over the next 30 years.
Fossil fuels will run out though....that's kind of indisputable.

[loopz]

If wind and solar could provide 30% of our energy needs then so be it, we waste far too much anyway....

So disregarding the facts that solar panels etc have a short life, a high initial cost and contain rare/expensive elements in thier construction, and wind power isn't the answer due to flutuating supplies,also high build costs and environmental impact, where does the other 70% come from?

I think the point he was trying to make was that we need to cut back on our energy consumption to make that 30% more like 50%...is that really going to happen?
Where is the rest coming from?...probably nuclear to be honest unless there is some major scientific breakthrough regarding bio-fuel over the next 30 years.
Fossil fuels will run out though....that's kind of indisputable.

What will probalbly happen though is as fossil fuels be come more expensive to get out of the ground the prices will continue to rise, till there out of reach of most families which is fast becoming the case...

It may seem doubtful but what other household bill has increased in price at the same rate of home energy? and i can't see it going back down to reasonable rates EVER!!!!! Just a thought but what happens if it keeps on rising at the rate it is? Mines doubled in the last few years and now another 20% hike ffs... alternatives are needed and i trust the Green party in helping to find solutions, more so than the main parties !!!!