(Original post by Davij038)
I don't think universal income is necessarily a bad idea, and I think there is some merit in there idea of reducing constant economic growth.
Copying what I said to an earlier reply:
On universal income;
We are a services-centric economic system, with a pre-eminent financial servies sector with high levels of migration and a heterogenous population.
This makes the UK particularly unsuited to a social democratic model, and increasing immigration would further exacerbate that. 280 billion pounds is a lot of money and this system risks disincentivising labour, not to mention costing is going to be made worse by the inevitable huge capital flight we would face due to punitive taxes.
This policy may have been workable in the 1960s, and they might work in certain small homogenous countries, but they certainly won't work here.
On reducing constant economic growth:
To mulitlaterally aim for a better management of resources is one thing, but unilaterally impoverishing ourselves will do nothing to stop the drive for constant growth. The instant we reduce our aggregate demand some other country will step in and prosper at our expense. A government's first duty is to its people, and impoverishing the people of the UK isn't in our interest.
On to your other points:
"Whilst they no doubt posses a great deal of the regressive left, I don't think that your portrayal is particularly fair- for instance they're against faith schools, forced marriage, FGM etc and support gay rights in the Arabic world."
And that is to their credit, but nonetheless they are naive in thinking anything other than military force can defeat ISIS, and their desire to welcome far more migrants from the middle east indicates they don't understand the cultural shock they will produce.
- They want to drastically cut the armed forces
"Meh, so did the Tories! I think they believe they can change the world for the better without resorting to force and see western intervention as not the best means of achieving this. This could be argued as naïve but I don't think its necessarily regressive."
I wasn't impressed with the Tory cuts either, but at least the Tory plan is to cut defence and have NATO fulfill our shortcomings. The Greens want to go it alone and be a peacekeeping force. One cannot be a global player without having some military clout to back you up. Given the Greens want to cut defence even more and scrap Trident, I don't see that happening.
- They want to increase foreign aid by 50%
"Depends on how its funded and where the money goes."
Agreed. But given their manifesto is uncosted and they've given no indications of reform, they appear to be failing on both counts.
- They want to legalise membership of terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda and ISIS. All those who went to join ISIS and partake in the killing and raping would be allowed to stroll back into the UK, no questions asked.
"Source? IIRC they wouldn't punish people for expressing support for terrorist groups [muh free speech] but I think the second sentence is false"
The Green party want to legalise membership of al-Qaeda or ISIS. It is therefore not a crime to go to Syria and join ISIS. To my knowledge, they would not then have committed an offence in the UK and could not, as British citizens, be denied entry. I may be wrong on this though, as there may be extraterritorial powers vis-a-vis terrorism.
Regardless, legalising membership fo ISIS is symbolically pretty despicable.
- They contend that any problem in the Middle East can be traceable to our intervention there
"This is definitely the worse part about them for me, although they are hardly alone in this. Indeed, they have very similar views to UKIP regarding intervention and Ukraine...."
Yes UKIP's stance is deplorable, I think this is an extension of UKIP's hatred of everything to do with the EU. Were the EU not involved I doubt they would object