Here is an example of what I mean:
One of the ideas, voiced by the VP candidate is to end homelessness by hiring folks to restore/repair empty homes and then putting formerly homeless people into them. It sounds good, and in fact, many cities/localities do that on a small scale. However, the most basic problem is that most of the available housing is not located by the available jobs. Also, while the recent downturn/mortgage crisis have seen more people who really do just need a place to live, who otherwise are able to fend.. a LOT of the long-term homeless are homeless because of big problems. Just giving them a house doesn't solve anything. They may be ill, psycologically ill, be substance addicted or convicted criminals. We cannot ignore the issue for these reasons, cannot just say "they deserve to be there" (not effective for society, for one thing.. regardless of how much they do or do not "deserve" to be there). However, its far from as simple as saying "here.. you have a house, now your life should be OK". Do that and you might just find the place trashed, rather than a grateful tenant.
But, to back up, here are the platforms:
(note.. I took this from a summary, not the Green Party link itself, just because I did not want to be too lengthy. However, feel free to point out any errors.. I will be double and triple checking there myself)
The first plank of this platform is to guarantee economic rights for all Americans. This entails the right to a job at a living wage for every American willing and able to work. It also entails the right to quality education, health care, utilities, and housing as well as the right to unionize, to fair taxation and to fair trade.
This I believe.
Dr. Stein has what she calls a Full Employment Program which will create 16 million jobs through a community-based direct employment initiative that is nationally funded, locally controlled and democratically protected.
The link did not give details, so I am not going to comment at this moment.
controlled and democratically protected.
There are many rights Dr. Stein wants to honor, include a right to quality healthcare through an improved Medicare for All program and a right to tuition-free, quality public education from pre-school through college at public institutions (Jill Stein would forgive student loan debt left over from the current era of unaffordable college education and couple this debt forgiveness with a tuition-free higher education based on the model of the post World War II GI Bill).
We have universal education up through high school. All the candidates talk about making college more affordable and accessible, though there is some discussion of whether everyone should to to college or if other types of higher education are better for some. That can be a distorted or honest discussion, but the point is that all the candidates push this. They differ in how they would implement it, but the Green Party's plan (such as it is) is not as workable right now.
In fact, when I have gotten into details on this, what too many in the green party consider "good education" is as distorted or more than right winger ideas. Animal centrism passes for science, disdain for anything Western European or Christian religious passes for diversity and a kind of mamby-pamby self esteem promotion too often substitutes for demands. To be fair, that is likely not how all Green Party folks feel, but it IS how the many I encountered in CA felt and what I hear from public supporters of the party now.
Jill Stein believes that it is necessary to halt all foreclosures and evictions and then to create a federal bank with local branches which would take over homes with distressed mortgages. These mortgages could either be restructured to affordable levels, or, if the occupants cannot afford a mortgage, then the homes will be rented to the occupants.
"And a chicken in every pot...." Sounds nice, but halt all foreclosures and evictions.. really??? Some people do need to be evicted, some people do need to be foreclosed. Instead, I would like to see something no one has suggested.. specifically to make the banks at least as responsible for downturns in the housing market (obviously NOT anything do to damage -- insurance covers accidents/disasters and the owner covers damage they cause). Most people are nothing like experts in the real estate market. They essentially rely upon appraisers, who have a sort of "chicken and egg" relationship with bankerson setting prices. Basically, people will buy a house for the mortgage a bank will offer them. If the house loses value, then the bank still wants its money -- may even increase its demands because the loan is no longer "secured". Making the bank at least partially responsible for losses will force banks to be more responsible in the loans they issue. (something like 100% responsible for market only losses for the first year, 75% for the next 3 years, then 50% thereafter) That, and a smaller, careful plan to move some housing into the public sector. (again, that last is already being done in many places where it is practical).
Being an activist for the way the health of the environment affects the health of the person, and being a (presumably, the) Green Party candidate, Dr. Stein as president would redirect research money from fossil fuels and other ‘dead-end’ industries toward research in wind, solar and geothermal. Along with this, she would invest in research in sustainable, nontoxic materials, closed-loop cycles that eliminate waste and pollution, as well as organic agriculture, permaculture, and sustainable forestry.
Absolutely. This is the one area where the Green Party has credibility, but they keep talking about more esoteric things and not enough about real economic costs and local demands.
I will use the northwest coast woods as an example because its past and you can see what happened. Luna butterfly whatever's approach was to go sit in a tree for a year and hope to halt logging. To contrast, my approach, the approach of a LOT of local individuals was to quietly talk to land owners about stream protection, salmon, etc. We lobbied for protection of endangered species and found the data to do it.. etc. Several of my classmates were ex loggers. They were not "anti logging", but were sometimes anti big corporate logging practices.
Anyway, fast forward and Luna got some fame, wrote a book and I believe is still doing the lecture circuit. She is a hero to some, but is a laughing stock among many people who actually work with and make decisions about timber. She is a showperson, not really an effective worker. (and let's not forget the effort it took from others to allow her to make "her" stand.)
My former bosses, many people I went to school with are did, are now working in the field in various ways..sometimes advising companies, sometimes teaching, sometimes advising small land owners and sometimes working for the government (which may include any of those previously mentioned). They are not (most of them) selling books, but they are affecting real and daily change. Does Luna talk to them? DID she talk to them? No. She was a grandstander. She would talk to you if you admired her, supported her. Else.. you were just "wrong", a "sell out". Yet.. who do you really think protected more forest? The tree she sat on is gone. Many I worked on still stand. AND... a lot of those I talked to are now advocates FOR protection of streams. They don't have much respect for Luna Butterfly, though.
Sooo... even on this issue, the Green Party is partially effective, they are not nearly as effective as they could be if they were willingto look beyond their "ideals". Teh Democrats have actually accomplished a lot more. Obama is supporting alternative energy to a point (not as much as I would like, but what I would like won't happen tommorrow).
Addressing the financial sector, Jill Stein would restore Glass-Steagall, establish a 90% tax on bonuses for bailed out bankers, regulate financial derivatives, break up the big banks that are ‘too big to fail’ and nationalize the Federal Reserve.
This is legally a non-starter. Its like trying to say you want an abolitionist to be elected Governor of Mississippi in 1825, and that promoting such is the way to end slavery.
She would also put in place a Voter’s Bill of Rights that would guarantee us a voter-marked paper ballot for all voting and require that all votes are counted before election results are released. It would also replace partisan oversight of elections with non-partisan election commissions, make Election Day a national holiday and bring simplified, safe same-day voter registration to the nation.
Election day used to be a national holiday, but the emphasis on paper ballots is just backwards. Good electronic voting over an extended time period would be far easier and more effective in this day and age.
Paper ballots require in person counting.
With concern to the military and homeland security, Dr. Stein would repeal the PATRIOT Act and the parts of the NDAA that violate civil liberties. She would also call for a 50% reduction in military spending that includes the withdrawal of U.S. military bases from the over 140 countries in which our military is now located.
Yes, I would like the Patriot Act repealed. Not convinced she would actually do it even if she was elected... a lot of Presidents make that type of promise and then are not able to deliver because it is very much tied into power adn some other reasons. I don't know what parts of NDAA is meant, have to research more.
Per cutting the military by 50% and closing foreign bases.. NO! That is not the kind of heavy-handed and immediate change we want. That she makes this her platform, like many of the other points highlights what I mean by lack of realism and ability to compromise.
) .... Who was it that brought what is called "conservativism" today, but which really amounted to "let's pay people today to forget about tommorrow" (borrow from the Social Security Trust to balance the budget.. cut taxes to create a mini-boom, even while knowing it could not be sustained without serious and major cuts to services people actually want... etc). Reagan. What group or movement had a LOT to do with both Nixon and Reagan gaining power? (and ironically enough, in 
