[article]Ireland sees $25bn inflows to beat trend

I'm wondering is this country doing as bad economically relatively as people sometimes talk it down as doing?
I heard recently on BBC's question time, Michael Howard lamenting that national income per head in the UK was less than that in the Republic of Ireland.

Todays indo: by Brendan Keenan

IRELAND won more foreign investment than Britain or Germany last year, as it shot to sixth place in the world as a location for FDI (foreign direct investment).

As FDI flows around the world fell another 18pc, Ireland avoided the trend, with inflows of $25.5bn up slightly on 2002.

This was 9pc of total flows into the EU, even though Ireland had only one per cent of the population of the pre-enlargement EU.

Welcoming the report from the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), Tánaiste Mary Harney said it showed Ireland remained an attractive location for inward investment.

"The Government has been prepared to take tough decisions to protect Irish competitiveness. This report demonstrates that we have been successful in that," Ms Harney said.

Inflows to the eastern European EU states halved last year to $11bn.

"Far from diverting flows from the old members of the EU, there was an unexpected plunge, mainly due to a drop in investments to the Czech Republic and Slovakia," UNCTAD says.

Ireland overtook Britain, Canada and the Netherlands as a recipient of FDI last year as inflows fell in these countries.

In Britain, inflows almost halved from $27.8bn to $14.5bn.

This was a fraction of the record $119bn received by the UK in 2000 and may reawaken debate about the effect on investors of Britain staying out of the euro.

UNCTAD points out that annual flows are volatile. Global FDI flows have fallen by two-thirds since 2001 to $560bn last year. But the report expects a rebound in most developed countries this year as economic growth improves.

Ireland ranks seventh in the world in the more stable FDI Potential Index prepared by UNCTAD.

This attempts to measure the policies and conditions which make foreign investment profitable. In 1990, Ireland was ranked 24th on this indicator.

Kieran Donoghue of IDA Ireland's planning division said that the report confirmed their experience of improving flows of investment since the slump in 2001.

He said that Ireland was also experiencing the shift to services investment highlighted in the report.

bonkey

Earthman wrote:

I'm wondering is this country doing as bad economically relatively as people sometimes talk it down as doing?

No, its not.....sortof.

As well as what you pointed out, Ireland is still amongst the fastest-growing (if not the fastest growing) economy in the EU.

The issue is that while the economy may be doing well from that perspective, there are other issues which offset it (e.g. increasing cost of living).

Ireland got hit less than many nations by the global economic slowdown. Being an island, we don't tend to actually see that quite as easily as many others might...

jc

PH01

bonkey wrote:

Ireland got hit less than many nations by the global economic slowdown. Being an island, we don't tend to actually see that quite as easily as many others might...

Hmmmm. Remember that old economic saying "...if Britian sneezes, Ireland catches the cold"? Not sure if that is relevent anymore. It was expect that Ireland would have gone into a slump with the last economic down turn (not sure if it has bottomed out at this stage), but it hasn't. It continues to grow strongly.
And you would expect that being an island nation would play against us - and it does. Higher transport costs and low population densities are a disadvantage.
So what's keeping us a float? It has got to be our economic policies and that we use the Euro.
Low taxes and low interest rates (because of the euro) keep this pocket rocket economy pumping along.

ionapaul

Thank God (or whomever) for the low corporate tax regime currently in place. Greatest thing ever to happen to independent Ireland IMO. In fact, in my mind it holds a more important place than Irish independence, certainly it has been the greatest catalyst for economic growth and thereby improved standards of living we could have hoped for, ahead of the wider availability of third-level education (also a great sea-change and catalyst for economic success).

We must be vigilant against any party or group that advocates higher taxes. In fact, as far as personal taxes are concerned, the 20% tax band needs to be widened considerably (personally I think move the upper limit for individuals from €28,000 towards €40,000) and the shortfall be matched by an increase in inheritance tax on the super-rich. This is probably an impossible task though. A topic for another day.

bonkey

PH01 wrote:

It was expect that Ireland would have gone into a slump with the last economic down turn (not sure if it has bottomed out at this stage), but it hasn't.

Not strictly true. Ireland did go into a slump, but it was nowhere near as severe as the slumps that other nations received.

In short, we got hit like everyone else, but resisted it better.

And you would expect that being an island nation would play against us - and it does. Higher transport costs and low population densities are a disadvantage.

Its not that simple. Most of those disadvantages are offset by a number of other advantages such as government incentives for foreign investment, educated workforce, etc.

So what's keeping us a float? It has got to be our economic policies and that we use the Euro.
Low taxes and low interest rates (because of the euro) keep this pocket rocket economy pumping along.

To a degree.

As I've pointed out before, some of the key advantages we have are technically breaches of the Trade Agreements we have within the EU, but which hithertofore we were allowed to break to give our economy a chance to grow. (e.g. the "incentive" packages the government has been allowed to offer.) Now that we are most definitely not the Poor Country Cuzzins in the EU any more, it is becoming increasingly expected of us to give up those advantages and to allow other nations with economies in more dire need of help to have them instead.

Once this change in EU policy/structure comes about, Ireland may become just as vulnerable as anyone else as we will no longer have a "special" attractiveness within the EU.

jc

ionapaul

Again, a little off-topic, but when/if the housing bubble bursts, it will have a knock-on effect and the wider economy will certainly suffer. To begin with, once a slow-down in housing construction kicks in (only around the corner), thousands of workers will be laid off and the boom in housing/construction materials will dry up. If housing prices drop by 20% (as suggested by many observers, see today's Irish Times for the IMF's view) IN ADDITION to a continued reduction/freeze in rental prices, those who bought houses and apartments as investments will sell, some (those buying in the last 18 months) at a loss, and the 'feel-good' athmosphere of 'we're all rich property owners' that lends itself to the culture of consumption and personal spending will disappear, directly hitting the retail/service sector in Ireland. I think the possibility of a housing bubble and sharp drop in housing prices is the greatest risk to short-term economic growth and an extremely real likelihood.

Redleslie2

bonkey wrote:

Now that we are most definitely not the Poor Country Cuzzins in the EU any more, it is becoming increasingly expected of us to give up those advantages and to allow other nations with economies in more dire need of help to have them instead.

Once this change in EU policy/structure comes about, Ireland may become just as vulnerable as anyone else as we will no longer have a "special" attractiveness within the EU.

jc

Only 3 more years of sponging off loser countries like Germany then we become net contributors to the EU.

:eek:

'Only four countries benefited from EU money in 2003- Portugal, Greece, Ireland and Spain - while the rest were net contributors. In terms of cash per head, the funding amounted to a net receipt of €391.70 for each Irish national. At the other of the scale, Dutch, Luxembourg and German nationals pay €120, €125 and €92.7 respectively, while each Briton pays €46.50.

In 2002, Irish Finance Minister Charlie McCreevy said that the 2001 net EU receipts in 2001, were equivalent to 4% on the standard rate of income tax and that the total in cash benefits since joining was almost equal to the then national debt.' Source.

bonkey

Yeah...thats exactly what I was referring to....

people talking about economies / peoples like Germany as being "loser" because our economy is clearly doing better.....when its doing so becuase they fund us, and they allow us to compete "unfairly" for inward investment.

jc

ionapaul

Redleslie2 wrote:

Only 3 more years of sponging off loser countries like Germany then we become net contributors to the EU.

Well, we gave it a good run, right? 3 years till the pain...

Redleslie2

Redleslie2 wrote:

while each Briton pays €46.50.

Thats tiny.
Even If we end up paying double that per head annually, the new chewing gum tax will pay a lot of it...

In 2002, Irish Finance Minister Charlie McCreevy said that the 2001 net EU receipts in 2001, were equivalent to 4% on the standard rate of income tax and that the total in cash benefits since joining was almost equal to the then national debt.'

Yes and we were *cough* entitled to every penny of it that was negotiated, with presumably a lot of it going on infrastructure which now only needs to be maintained rather than be re-built.
Note that the country has been regionalised in order to maximise funding in future years ring fenced for the "poorer" regions of Ireland so that will at least for the next decade ameliorate much of the potential financial pain of the"net payment to the E.U" consequence of the countries economic sucess.

PH01

bonkey wrote:

Once this change in EU policy/structure comes about, Ireland may become just as vulnerable as anyone else as we will no longer have a "special" attractiveness within the EU.

Yip. When more EU countries start adopting the same taxation policies as Ireland, we will certainly start losing some of our shine.

Lennoxschips

And you would expect that being an island nation would play against us - and it does. Higher transport costs and low population densities are a disadvantage.

I don't think that higer transport costs and low population density are to blame for Ireland's horrendus living expenses. If that were the case then Australia would be the world's most expensive country. The Netherlands is under sealevel and has to pump (po pun intended) billions of Euros into keeping their feet dry every year. Yet they still have a lower cost of living than us, go figure.

I'm afraid the cost of living in Ireland is mostly due to financial mismanagement. Wim Doesenburg warned McCreevey in 2000 that Ireland was due for massive inflation and told Fianna Fail what to do to fix it, but they decided to ignore him.

mike65

Its always good when a leading UK politico cites how well we're doing, makes a change from when someone, I forget whom likened Ireland to Albainia about 10-12 years ago.

I think the ecomony here is largely recession proof at the moment, its an advantage when you're a small, open market. Reaction times tend to be quicker as companies have little trouble hiring and firing as required.

I dont see any great bump when the structural funds dry up, but there will have to be (and should be anyway) much greater attention paid to where the public money goes and how its spent. I suspect if an efficency audit were carried out of every spending dept the results would be dismal.

Mike.

PH01

Lennoxschips wrote:

I don't think that higer transport costs and low population density are to blame for Ireland's horrendus living expenses. If that were the case then Australia would be the world's most expensive country. The Netherlands is under sealevel and has to pump (po pun intended) billions of Euros into keeping their feet dry every year. Yet they still have a lower cost of living than us, go figure.

Surely you're not saying that both Australia and Holland are cheap to live in? However, these countries do have clear advantages over Ireland.
Australia has abundant natural resources, 17 Million population which is mostly concentrated into a small section of the south-east corner, great infrastructure and they have a bit more land then Ireland. They have no problem meeting increased demand with supply.
The Netherlands has the majority of it 16 million population living in urban areas which is served by a fully utilised infrastructure network. The Dutch economy is an open, export oriented economy. More than half of what the Netherlands produces is destined for foreign markets. The pillars of the Dutch economy include not only trade and distribution, but also high-tech industry and a sizeable services sector. The Netherlands is superbly located and has the advantage to easy access to neighbouring countries. It has also being part of a common market with Germany, France, Italy, Belgium and Luxembourg since 1957. There are many more factors which help this county keep it's cost of living sustainable to a certain extent.

Ireland doesn't have these advantages. Ireland is rapidly becoming a very wealthy country. I've forgotten how much the economy has grown in the last 10 years, but it's probably around the 140% mark. And you can't expect prices to remain static when the wealth of the country has grown so much - it's nearly physically impossible.
Most of our infrastructure is substandard and the costs of bring this to acceptable levels is unaffordable. Just look that costs of building the Luas. The factors which produced these costs are well documented. If you multiply that cost up to cover the whole infrastructure shopping list - it comes to one hell of a bill.
You could fit two Netherlands into the area of Ireland, and you would have to increase the population of Ireland four times to equal that of the Netherlands. And if you did, the cost of living would come down. The cost of infrastructure would become more affordable for one - as the Government would have more revenue to play with. Yes, I know the costs of a 16 million population are higher, but cost per capita are far cheaper - economies of scale and all that.

Surely you still can't think that being a low population density island is not a disadvantage?

Lennoxschips wrote:

I'm afraid the cost of living in Ireland is mostly due to financial mismanagement. Wim Doesenburg warned McCreevey in 2000 that Ireland was due for massive inflation and told Fianna Fail what to do to fix it, but they decided to ignore him.

You're not saying that some one who spends 30 minutes a week reading about the Irish economy would be better at managing that economy than the Finance Minister of that economy?

bonkey

PH01 wrote:

Surely you still can't think that being a low population density island is not a disadvantage?

I find it funny that you argue that Australia isn't really a low-population-density island because the populations are concentrated in a small area with good infrastructure....and yet when it comes to Ireland, you ignore the fact that the majority of our population is also concentrated into a relatively small number of relatively small areas, each of which tends to have a local infrastructure far superior to the national average.

Compare liek with like. Either Australia is a low-density country, or you shouldn't be looking at the overall national population density of Ireland in comparison, but rather at our main investment locations...which are the high-density areas with established infrastructure far above the national average. They are also coastal areas, typically close to international airports, giving easy access to whatever type of transport is required.

Finally, in terms of transport costs.....is being based in Ireland really that much of an issue? Trans-continental costs will be negligably different. Intra-European costs will also not be that significantly different from what I can see...the increase in cost-per-shipment really shouldn't be significant compared to the value-per-shipment of goods. The only area we'd find it tough to be competitive in is high-volume, low-cost goods....and to be hoenst I don't see that as a market Ireland is ever likely to have even wanted to be strong in (outside agriculture, where EU quotas and subsidies make the issue non-existant anyway).

jc

PH01

bonkey wrote:

I find it funny that you argue that Australia isn't really a low-population-density island because the populations are concentrated in a small area with good infrastructure....and yet when it comes to Ireland, you ignore the fact that the majority of our population is also concentrated into a relatively small number of relatively small areas, each of which tends to have a local infrastructure far superior to the national average.

Compare liek with like. Either Australia is a low-density country, or you shouldn't be looking at the overall national population density of Ireland in comparison, but rather at our main investment locations...which are the high-density areas with established infrastructure far above the national average. They are also coastal areas, typically close to international airports, giving easy access to whatever type of transport is required.

Finally, in terms of transport costs.....is being based in Ireland really that much of an issue? Trans-continental costs will be negligably different. Intra-European costs will also not be that significantly different from what I can see...the increase in cost-per-shipment really shouldn't be significant compared to the value-per-shipment of goods. The only area we'd find it tough to be competitive in is high-volume, low-cost goods....and to be hoenst I don't see that as a market Ireland is ever likely to have even wanted to be strong in (outside agriculture, where EU quotas and subsidies make the issue non-existant anyway).

jc

Use the Aran Islands, or any other populated island off the coast of ireland, as a test case, explain why the cost of goods and services are higher there than in the rest of Ireland?

bonkey

PH01 wrote:

Use the Aran Islands, or any other populated island off the coast of ireland, as a test case, explain why the cost of goods and services are higher there than in the rest of Ireland?

Because it completely ignores the point I made where I pointed out that the increase in cost-per-shipment really shouldn't be significant compared to the value-per-shipment of goods.

Shipping to/from the Aran islands from the mainland is an entirely different situation, as the volume-change will not be proportionate to the cost-per-shipment change. In fact, every single economy-of-scale I can think of goes out the window when you examine such a small population.

Looking at it the other way around, the Arran islands would also not be a suitable place for any non-specialist low-volume/high-margin-per-unit production...for exactly the same reason - the additional shipping-cost-per-unit would be extremely high.

I'm asking whether or not for a nation the size of Ireland, its really an issue. I don't believe it realistically is any more, especially now that our markets are diversified over a sufficiently large area that the "island-to-mainland" shipping cost becomes less and less of a factor.

jc

PH01

bonkey wrote:

Because it completely ignores the point I made where I pointed out that the increase in cost-per-shipment really shouldn't be significant compared to the value-per-shipment of goods.

Cost per shipment would depend on size or quantity, surely?

bonkey wrote:

Shipping to/from the Aran islands from the mainland is an entirely different situation, as the volume-change will not be proportionate to the cost-per-shipment change. In fact, every single economy-of-scale I can think of goes out the window when you examine such a small population.

Looking at it the other way around, the Arran islands would also not be a suitable place for any non-specialist low-volume/high-margin-per-unit production...for exactly the same reason - the additional shipping-cost-per-unit would be extremely high.

Well what I was trying to argue by using that test case is that fundamentally the economic relationship between the Arran Islands and the rest of Ireland is the same as as the relationship of Ireland and the rest of the world. Ok, the Arran Islands isn't probably the best case to use - perhaps if it had a bigger population it would make it a better test case.

bonkey wrote:

I'm asking whether or not for a nation the size of Ireland, its really an issue. I don't believe it realistically is any more, especially now that our markets are diversified over a sufficiently large area that the "island-to-mainland" shipping cost becomes less and less of a factor.

jc

In some respects you're right. Like buying and downloading software doesn't matter where you are. But shipping goods by sea or air is a cost, and these will be higher if you're on an island. I don't think there's any getting away from it, is there?
At the end of the day size does matter.

bonkey

PH01 wrote:

In some respects you're right. Like buying and downloading software doesn't matter where you are. But shipping goods by sea or air is a cost, and these will be higher if you're on an island. I don't think there's any getting away from it, is there?

Well, I would posit that transporting by air is not any different. What does a plane care if its flying over land or water

As for shipping....sure....it makes some difference, but the point I'm trying to make is that I don't believe that the difference per unit is significant in terms of overall unit costs.

Perhaps, more accurately, I should say that there are large sectors of the market where the above holds true, and those sectors are the ones that Ireland tends to attract.

It is also highly dependant on your destination market. F'r example...do you think it would be cheaper to ship (i.e. transport by ship) to the US from Ireland or Switzerland? To Australia? To Japan? To any non-European maritime market?

So ultimately, I gues what I'm trying to say is that while there are industries and markets that Ireland is not an attractive location for....there are also plenty where the issues you highlight do not play any significant role....and they tend to be the ones we attract

PH01 wrote:

At the end of the day size does matter.

Hey..how did you know what she....

Oh never mind

jc

RainyDay

ionapaul wrote:

Thank God (or whomever) for the low corporate tax regime currently in place. Greatest thing ever to happen to independent Ireland IMO. In fact, in my mind it holds a more important place than Irish independence, certainly it has been the greatest catalyst for economic growth and thereby improved standards of living we could have hoped for, ahead of the wider availability of third-level education (also a great sea-change and catalyst for economic success).

It is not a smart tactic to base your economic success on being the cheapest country (in terms of corporate taxes). It's not that difficult for Eastern Europe, or India or China to offer a 5% corporate tax rate to beat our 10% - what do we do then?

Cork

When countrys are doing well prices rise. You don't hear the Swiss harping on about Rip off Switzerland. This point was made in the back page of the Business Secton of the Sunday Tribune.

Prices are lower in countries that are not doing as well economically.

When you look at the money that is being spend on booze in this country.

Could you imagine that type of money being spend on booze here in the 1980's. I am not even going to mention foriegn holidays. People taking more than one is not very rare.

Even students - When I was at school - many hitched for drives. People no longer do so in such numbers (leaving the safety agruement aside).

Ireland is expecting a 5% growth rate. Unemployment is low. But you cnnot expect low prices in a trieving ecomony.

bonkey

Cork wrote:

When countrys are doing well prices rise. You don't hear the Swiss harping on about Rip off Switzerland. This point was made in the back page of the Business Secton of the Sunday Tribune.

Well, if its in the paper, it must be true. I wonder if the reporter was aware of the following facts...

1) Maybe its not reported on internationally, but in Switzerland, you do hear quite a lot of complaints about how Switzerland's cost of living is so much higher than its neighbouring countries, and how there is a massive need to reduce it. A key objective of one of the key government ministers (can't remember who) for example, is to get the price of meat in Switzerland to drop by between 25% and 33% in the next 2 (I think) years, to bring it in line with the EU average.

2) In Switzerland, you don't hear much about rip-off Ireland. Does that mean that Ireland isn't expensive? No? Then what the fsck is the relevance that the Irish don't hear the Swiss on about it?

3) In Switzerland, salaries are comparably higher, and not just in prestige jobs. For example, it is quite common for ppl to work less than 100%, and not just in classical high-paying jobs. I know several people my age living on their own, working in what are considered medium- to medium-low-salary jobs (e.g. office secretary) who work between 60% and 80% jobs (i.e. 3-5 days a week). Can you afford to do that in rip-off-Ireland?

jc

Cork

bonkey wrote:

. I know several people my age living on their own, working in what are considered medium- to medium-low-salary jobs (e.g. office secretary) who work between 60% and 80% jobs (i.e. 3-5 days a week). Can you afford to do that in rip-off-Ireland?

jc

But we have got pay increases over the last 5 years that far exceeded increases in other EU countries. We have also been in reciept of taxation reductions.

Sure, the cost of living has increased. But our unemployment rates are very low compared to the EU.

If shops etc were ripping us off - How come they more of us are not opening shops to earn these massive profits?

We are paying a pretty low % of our incomes on food. We are spending much on drink & other consumer goods.

Very few countries across the EU spend so much on drink.

Some people have surplus income so they can afford to go out and drink themselves silly. People now have massive disposable income.



Many friends of mine are living with their parents and instead of havving massive mortgage - they have nice clothes and a nice car.

They are leading a pretty good life style - good social and work life etc.

A factory yesterday in the West of Ireland let go some of its work force. It was re locating some jobs to Portugal as wages here were too high.

Where wage rates are lower - the cost of living is also lower.

LightofDarkness

Speaking of the standard of living, this is true. I moved over to the states at age 2. I moved back here at age 9. Now, when I first moved back over here, I immediately noticed how the standard of living wasn't anything close to the one I enjoyed in America. However, in the last 5 years especially, I have noticed the line blurring and now the standards are almost equal, thanks to almost yearly visits to the States. I use this as a good judge as to Ireland's economic status. Sure, cost of living is high, but that's when you include alcohol and cigarettes in your cost of living, which most people do and those are among the highest taxed items in the country. But believe me, other things do seem to be more expensive in America than they are here.

Lennoxschips

I have lived in the Netherlands since 1995 and when I first moved to the Netherlands thought everything was expensive here in NL. I can remember going back to Ireland and thinking how cheap everthing over there was. Now when I go to Ireland I am gobsmacked by the high prices. As far as I can see it hasn't translated into higher standard of living either, Holland beats Ireland on every front.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

arcadegame2004

Someone here mentioned problems of inflation i.e. cost-of-living. Surely this is reflective of the lack of competition in certain parts of the economy i.e. the bus-sector, the electricity-sector, the gas-industry, and probably worst of all - the pub-industry? State-owned monopolies and the system that protects their monopolism is largely responsible for the above (except the last item).. I predict that increased competition in the parts of industry still dominated by central-government will keep inflation at a level lower than it would otherwise be, as rival companies undercut each other in price terms.

I also call for the deregulation of the pub industry. The inflation statistics always show that alcohol prices are a significant part of the inflation problem. Pious declarations by politicians like Michael Martin opposing deregulation of this sector for reasons supposedly related to health make me suspicious as to whether the influence of the pub-lobby has more to do with the motivations of politicians of such an ilk. They are still a powerful interest group. The fewer competitors in a market, the more likely cartels become, to the detriment of the public-interest.

I have lived in the Netherlands since 1995 and when I first moved to the Netherlands thought everything was expensive here in NL. I can remember going back to Ireland and thinking how cheap everthing over there was. Now when I go to Ireland I am gobsmacked by the high prices. As far as I can see it hasn't translated into higher standard of living either, Holland beats Ireland on every front.

Maybe that owes much to the fact that the Netherlands are substantially further down the privatisation road than we are e.g. privatised Post Office.

Cork

I agree. It is about time that we had more competition.

Why should Dublin bus not face competition?

Why could you not open a pharmacy within a certain distance of a competitor?
Why can't shops be over a certain size?


Price Increases in the electricity are determined by a regulator. But why can't state companies look at their own cost base and work practices than passing on price hikes to the consumer.

Pubs get a state licence to serve beer. These licences are traded at big amounts of money.

Licences are been sold well above their nominal value what they were acquired from the state.

This is crazy. State licences are a barrier to competition. The state is to blame for the lack of competion in many sectors.

Sparks

I'd love to know how deregulation of the pub industry is going to help prices (which are pretty much set by Diageo) or the rising level of antisocial offences in this country.

As to privatisation of state services, *raspberry*

Meh

Sparks wrote:

I'd love to know how deregulation of the pub industry is going to help prices (which are pretty much set by Diageo)[/b]

Incorrect, the brewer only gets 85 cents from every pint

or the rising level of antisocial offences in this country.

Also incorrect. "Assaults causing harm" are down significantly so far this year. You need to stop reading tabloid headlines.

Cork

Sparks wrote:

I'd love to know how deregulation of the pub industry is going to help prices (which are pretty much set by Diageo) or the rising level of antisocial offences in this country.

As to privatisation of state services, *raspberry*

Well, the sate has issued a finate number of licences. These are now been bought and sold on the open market for many 1000's of euro.

The purchaser of such a licence will have to try and make this back from the consumer.

Sparks

Meh, assault is certainly an antisocial act; but not all antisocial acts are listed by the Gardai as assaults. Rapes for example, are a seperate category. As are homicides, drink driving offences and a multitude of other antisocial acts where alcohol is a contributing or factor or primary cause.

PH01

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

...like what have the Romans, sorry British ever done for us?

therecklessone

Cork wrote:

I agree. It is about time that we had more competition.

Yeah, because the insurance and baking sectors are such a great example of prices tumbling in the face of competition...

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

sceptre

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Mmm, Brennan's and Pat The Baker appear to have a regular cartel of quality bread going on[1].

Banking industry isn't that competitive either.


Meanwhile I still find it hilarious that competition is touted by anyone as the ultimate solution to rising prices. Especially in an economy of our size. Are we touting pure supply-side economics again? Is it 1986 already? Did we read beyond page 100 of the Big Lego Guide To Modern Macroeconomics? Obviously competition in an open market is good but it's not a panacea so it's always painful to see it touted as such.

(and what all this has to do with the original thread article I don't know but I suppose it's your circus)

[1]Except for that nice wholemeal bread with the nuts in it that one can get from Dunnes or Lidl. Nice.

ionapaul

All I know about 'rip-off' Ireland is that as far as 'disposable income' and standards of living go, both were much MUCH higher for me while I lived in the States. I earned far more for a less-taxing job, and despite living in the Bay Area (some of the highest rents in the US, though not far above Dublin's current prices!) saved far more money each month than I do here AND enjoyed a better social and recreational life. As someone else posted in an earlier thread, although Ireland now has a high income-per-capita figure, the average worker is not particularly wealthy, as we are not saving enough - partly due to how amazingly expensive it is to live here!
I am considering emigrating to Canada in a few years (in some part dependant on how housing prices move here) and know that although I will be earning less than I would in Dublin, I will have a much higher standard of living.