Are The Greens the new Raving Loony Party!

"Born and educated in Australia.
Degrees in Agricultural Science, Asian Study and Mass Communication.
Journalist on provincial Australian newspapers, The Independent and The Times.
Spent 18 months as a volunteer in the Office of the National Commission on Women's Affairs in Thailand.
Worked as a consultant to the ILO, WHO and other UN organisations across Asia.
Editor of Guardian Weekly from 2007 to March 2012."

No, Ana, but she's done more than either Osborne or Cameron.

Cameron got a first in PPE at Oxford, so he has certainly studied economics.

Here's someone else for you to read, janea.

www.searchingfinance.com/news-and-views/soon-from-william-keegan-and-searching-finance-mr-osborne-s-economic-experiment.html

Has Natalie Bennett formally studied ecomonics?

I do not think that making rich people richer and poor people poorer is very sound, and that is what this government and the previous one did. That is not skilful management of the economy.
Neither Cameron nor Osborne had formally studied economics, and look what they have done.

I said I didn't have an understanding of economics meaning that I have never formally studied the subject Jen.
I'm quite capable of reading articles by respected commentators like Robert Peston, Kamal Ahmed and Nick Robinson et al and considering the arguments they put forward.
For everyone to have enough, it stands to reason that the economy has to be skilfully managed. It's up to politicians seeking power to demonstarate how they will do that, honestly and in terms that the elctorate can understand.

I watched it. Shame he did not let her finish her answers.

I've signed, grannyactivist. So what is sound economics, janea?
Why say you would not be swayed by idealism that was not based on sound economics, then say you do not know what sound economics is?

Enough is enough is my economic ideal. Why does everybody want to have more than they need? That's what has got the world into this mess.
If that's being stupid, then okay, I admit to it, but I'd rather be idealistic than greedy.

Rosequartz

Google it or watch it on I player, certainly interesting. Sunday Politics 25/01/15

No I didn't - did he pull her to shreds?

Earnest green Australians are rarely entertaining

Apart from TerriBull did any other GN'er see the Andrew Neil/Natalie Bennett interview?

In answer to the original post, yes, the Greens may be the next Raving Loony party....... but not so entertaining.

I don't have have an understanding of economics either grannyactivist but I think it's fundamental to any political system, and the problem with our democracy is that only a very small proportion of the voters do have sufficient understanding to make an informed choice at the ballot box. I'm not advocating a dictatorship by the way.
Thank you for the links, I will look at them later.

What are 'sound' economics though janeainsworth? I don't pretend to have an in depth understanding of national or international monetary policies, but my son and husband do and they subscribe to the view taken by positive money, and what I've seen makes good sense to me to me too; albeit with my more limited understanding. All the government seems to offer for recovery is growth and more growth, which even I know is unsustainable. The Green Party have economic policies broadly in line with those put forward by Positive Money. I challenge anyone to spend 3 minutes 20 seconds watching the video and not be concerned about current economic policy. If anyone has half an hour or so then watch Martin Wolf, widely considered to be one of the world's most influential writers on economics reiterating the same points.

Oh janea- I wished I believed that there were such a thing as ' sound economics'

Jen You ask what's wrong with being idealistic.
As Bill Clinton put it, 'The economy, stupid.'

I'll be interested to see what economic strategies all the parties propose, but I wouldn't be swayed by idealism that wasn't underpinned by sound economics.

Skim read, not sim!

Oh, I read a lot and had to be sent outside to 'get some fesh air' when I invariably fell over and scraped my knees!

I did have a look at it and a sim read, but not an indepth study.
A good dose of idealism is fine but practicalities are what society is run on in the main.

Have you read the Green Party manifesto, rose? What's wrong with being idealistic?
How many other manifestos have you read, and how idealistic are they?

No, rose, but I got an arrow in my eye on my fifth birthday and was not allowed to play out, so a bike would have been superfluous. I read a lot, though.

Eloethan, I do not think that councils have to outsource recycling collections, but it works out cheaper somehow in some cases.
Durham County Council had 80% less waste going to landfill in the last year.
All the recycling goes in the same truck, with glass being kept separate for safety reasons. Then it goes to a plant where it is sorted manually.
Schools go there for visits, and hands on experience.
I've often thought that working in a recycling centre would be a useful thing for those given community service.
Most newspapers will tell you how much recycled paper is used for their paper, 78% for the Independent and the Guardian.
So if all you do is recycle paper, you save a lot of trees, and your council tax is less than it would be if everything went to landfill.

Our Council had a good recycling rate last year, despite some problems with food waste recycling.
However, so much more can be done and are the supermarkets listening?

I am not at all sure about the Green Party's aims; they seem at best at unrealistically idealistic and at worst quite worryingly unthought through and tending towards communism.

Were/are you very ladylike then, djen?

I was a bit of a harum scarum kid, always with plasters on my knees, torn clothes, climbing trees.
I think DM despaired.
Of course I am very ladylike now.

I thought all household refuse collection was contracted out to private companies now?

I often wonder about this cost issue. It may be more expensive, money-wise, to have to sort items for re-cycling and then distribute them appropriately to whatever business re-cycles them. It may be cheaper just to collect the whole lot together and chuck it in landfill or local incinerators (or, as was reported a few years ago, ship it over to poorer countries and dump it there).

But the environmental cost is surely much higher with the non-recycling options and wasn't it being reported that we were running out of suitable landfill sites?

Also, if material is re-cycled, doesn't that mean that less of it has to be extracted from the natural environment?

Over sixty percent of our waste in this county did not go to landfill last year.

Why is your son in law an environment officer if he does not care about the environment, Mishap?

I wasn't allowed a bike!

Our recycling is collected by a private company Mishap and they are making a profit. In our district we have a comprehensive recycling system which includes all the usual paper, cardboard, metal, glass plus plastics.

In addition all garden and kitchen waste is collected and turned (by this company) into compost which is then sold at a profit. I believe they have invested in special equipment which encourages this to decompose more quickly.