O'Leary on RTE this morning , priceless!

silverharp

Did anyone catch Micheal O'Leary on Marian Finuchan this morning on RTE radio this morning. I coudlnt keep up with all his one liners but his logic should be compelling unless one thinks the country is currently being well run, lol.


http://dynamic.rte.ie/quickaxs/209-rte-marianfinucane-2009-11-28.smil
you Real player installed

bridgitt

He was brilliant. If only we had someone with an ounce of his common sense in charge. Its great to think as a country we can produce people like him, who has grown the worlds largest airline from humble beginnings , and who pays his taxes in Ireland.

gerry28

O'leary is extreme capitalism. He would widen the gap between rich and poor.

Large swathes of the country would be working for a pittance and barely surviving under his watch.

ntlbell

gerry28 wrote: »

O'leary is extreme capitalism. He would widen the gap between rich and poor.

Large swathes of the country would be working for a pittance and barely surviving under his watch.

i don't think so, people who work hard and do thier job would do well and the lazy shower wouldn't

as it should be.

TimAllen

The guy, by his own admission, is a lunatic. He would run the country well as a military dictator but he is no politican.
To lead a democratic country, you must have the consent of its citizens - O'Leary would lose that in 5 minutes.
Last week he said that he would cut €20 billion in public spending straight away - such a move would cause economic collapse and riots on the streets!
He has some good ideas but he is a maverick who serves his own interests well but I wouldnt want him running our country

Sand

Yep, O Leary is a fantastic advertisement for what Irish people can do with the right attitude. His offer to take 4 hours to help advise on how to fix the deficit is something any Irish government should take him up on. It would be valuable for the culture shock he would provide alone, asking the questions the public sector are terrified of having to answer.

The disaster we are in currently is a symptom of the fact that Bertie met O Leary twice by his reckoning, and yet the likes of Begg and O Connor and the other trade unions were invited to run the country for the past 7 or 8 years.

I think he could have been a bit stronger on defending McCreevy. The fiscal problem isnt rooted in cutting taxes. The fiscal problem is rooted in cutting taxes AND also boosting spending unsustainably.

McCreevy was forced out of government by Bertie because McCreevys unwillingness to cut loose the spending in the manner Bertie and the others in cabinet wanted. Cowen was dropped in as a loyal FF tribalist and the spending began jumping massively with no consideration for sustainability.

ntlbell

TimAllen wrote: »

The guy, by his own admission, is a lunatic. He would run the country well as a military dictator but he is no politican.
To lead a democratic country, you must have the consent of its citizens - O'Leary would lose that in 5 minutes.
Last week he said that he would cut €20 billion in public spending straight away - such a move would cause economic collapse and riots on the streets!
He has some good ideas but he is a maverick who serves his own interests well but I wouldnt want him running our country

He doesn't want to run it.

that doesn't mean the goverment shouldn't listen to people _like_ him.

telecaster

he was good, but he was unchallenged on everything he said. Easy to look clever when no one is pulling you up on anything you say.

(small and largely irrelevant exception when MF told him RTE had 4 radio channels rather than 2)

ntlbell

telecaster wrote: »

he was good, but he was unchallenged on everything he said. Easy to look clever when no one is pulling you up on anything you say.

(small and largely irrelevant exception when MF told him RTE had 4 radio channels rather than 2)

well his target is an icompetent goverment who could challenge him?

bridgitt

ntlbell wrote: »

i don't think so, people who work hard and do thier job would do well and the lazy shower wouldn't as it should be.

+1. As he outlined there are savings of tens of billions to be made, never mind the pussyfooting with the 4 billion in this budget, which will still see the government debt increasing massively in the future.
O'Leary today on the radio describing how he does not use or waste money on advertising agencies , pr people, consultants etc was classic. As an aside , I remember from an interview years ago O'Leary said that when he wanted his website designed and made, he got two students to do it in their spare time, for a small sum. Nowadays, the public sector have copious amounts of their own IT specialists ( all I am sure on big pay and pensions ), yet the government pays 200 million a year to outsourced IT consultants. OLeary would not tolerate a third of a million public servants in a country with a population the size of Manchester. He would cut welfare, and cut public service expenditure , ( the 2 biggest drains on the exchequer). He said he thought the public service should work 40 hours ( like everone else ) a week instead of 32, have the same holidays + sickies as in the private sector, and if they did did not like it they could leave. As the OP said, priceless !

ntlbell

bridgitt wrote: »

. Nowadays, the public sector have copious amounts of their own IT specialists ( all I am sure on big pay and pensions ), yet the government pays 200 million a year to outsourced IT consultants.

I used to be one of them (not a PS ) the stories I could tell you about the amount of wastage here is pretty frightening.

Just a small example there was 8 "IT specialists" (ps workers) managing two sites one site had 25 ps workers the other office had 4.

the "specialists" were split evenly across both sites, so on one site you had the same amount of "IT specialists" as workers.

The job we were doing was not overly technical but they outsourced the job to us instead of doing it themselves.

So every now and then I would have a question for one of them so I had to go and disturb their gaming session (which was hosted on a dedicated eircom leased line that they got installed for their own personal useage) where they would shurg their shoulders "i dunno? is that not why you're here?"

This was only the start of my introduction to what the PS was really like

scary.

murphaph

bridgitt wrote: »

+1. As he outlined there are savings of tens of billions to be made, never mind the pussyfooting with the 4 billion in this budget, which will still see the government debt increasing massively in the future.
O'Leary today on the radio describing how he does not use or waste money on advertising agencies , pr people, consultants etc was classic. As an aside , I remember from an interview years ago O'Leary said that when he wanted his website designed and made, he got two students to do it in their spare time, for a small sum. Nowadays, the public sector have copious amounts of their own IT specialists ( all I am sure on big pay and pensions ), yet the government pays 200 million a year to outsourced IT consultants. OLeary would not tolerate a third of a million public servants in a country with a population the size of Manchester. He would cut welfare, and cut public service expenditure , ( the 2 biggest drains on the exchequer). He said he thought the public service should work 40 hours ( like everone else ) a week instead of 32, have the same holidays + sickies as in the private sector, and if they did did not like it they could leave. As the OP said, priceless !

So you mean, that awful awful man wants our precious public servants to all work, shock horror-40 hours a week?! That's outrageous! One out-all out!

People say he would grow the gap between rich and poor but before his airline came along it was the state which was fleecing its own people out of about IR£300 to fly to London IIRC. O'Leary's horrible little private sector enterprise was the driving force which allowed the lower paid, for the first time, to fly out of Ireland!

I don't agree with everything he says, but it's his tenacious ability to find and eradicate waste in a company that would be most useful to our country. No lazy public sector worker would be safe and the decent ones could look forward to pay rises.

gerry28

gerry28 wrote: »

O'leary is extreme capitalism. He would widen the gap between rich and poor.

Large swathes of the country would be working for a pittance and barely surviving under his watch.

It would end the welfare state. Good riddance. People willing to work hard would be rewarded. About time.

who what when

I lost count of the amount of people he said 'should be brought out the back and shot'!
At least 6, even included himself at one stage!

deadhead13

Deleted User wrote: »

It would end the welfare state. Good riddance. People willing to work hard would be rewarded. About time.

Not even Micheal O'leary is that mad, he did however claimed he would cut social welfare by 20%. Are the hard working Ryanair staff well rewarded?

The political party closest to sharing O'Leary's world view would have been the PD's - and look what happened them.

Barname

TimAllen wrote: »

The guy, by his own admission, is a lunatic. He would run the country well as a military dictator but he is no politican.
To lead a democratic country, you must have the consent of its citizens - O'Leary would lose that in 5 minutes.
Last week he said that he would cut €20 billion in public spending straight away - such a move would cause economic collapse and riots on the streets!
He has some good ideas but he is a maverick who serves his own interests well but I wouldnt want him running our country

FAIL

you are wrong. consensus only brought us the bertie bubble

consensus = €100 Billion plus in debt

consensus = a pipe dream, an illusion

this country now requires REAL leadership, to hell with the me feiner whiners.

Sand

What I think is very telling is that when words like efficiency, or value for money are mentioned, the public sector and the trade unions hiss and howl. These are evil things, and O Leary is their avatar.

He's right that in any other country the success of Ryanair would be celebrated, but in a country like Ireland which has been taken over by the likes of Begg and O Connor, hes cursed as being some sort of monster. The Irish aristocracy ( the public sector) despise efficiency. It's a disgusting thing. So what if they spend twice as much money as they need to? So what if it's job for the boys? Sure, its only the taxpayers money.

We ought to be building statues of O Leary in every town square in Ireland. As he pointed out, the government was colluding with Aer Lingus and British Airways to make it illegal for any travel agent to offer a ticket cheaper than Aer Lingus or BA were willing to sell. That is where the David Begg/Jack O Connor model leads.

There is a mentality amongst the washed up bearded communists in the civil service and trade unions who think that the best way to generate tax revenue is to tax any current economic activity until it dies, effectively out of spite, whereas the real way to generate tax revenue is to encourage economic activity so you have something to tax.

Dannyboy83

Would it really make a difference I wonder?

Why do they need O'Leary specifically?
They already had the McCarthy report months and months ago.
From what I understand, they've ignored the vast majority of what was said there. As O'Leary said, they took 3 months holidays at the time.

So if they won't listen to Colm McCarthy who has given an indepth assessment of the situation, how can Michael O'Leary help?

Mr.Micro

O'Leary is flogging dead horse if he thinks he can get through to the likes of Cowen and Co to adopt a more pragmatic and realistic approach to raising revenue. Its all about party politics in the end. What may be good for the country is not necessarily good for FF or its cronies, the banks and developers. He should advise Mr.Cowen to get his Government to stand down and let a new Government try and sort out the mess as this one will forever be associated with the economic disaster that we have at present and the public will be forced to pay for it.

Dannyboy83

ntlbell wrote: »

So every now and then I would have a question for one of them so I had to go and disturb their gaming session (which was hosted on a dedicated eircom leased line that they got installed for their own personal useage) where they would shurg their shoulders "i dunno? is that not why you're here?"

:D:D:D:D
Thats comical.
I work in IT so I know you have peaks and troughs, but certain areas of PS are starting to sound like those mad dreams you would have as a teenager.
All its missing is the beer.

There was some poster here who said they were working at some PS site, and they had a bed set up in the stockroom for hangovers. LMAO!!
I told this to a relative who works in the Revenue and he was dumbfounded, he said they barely get a coffee break sometimes.

gerry28

bridgitt wrote: »

He said he thought the public service should work 40 hours ( like everone else ) a week instead of 32

Why let the truth get in the way of a good rant.

From the CSO the average working week in ireland is 34.8 hrs (not 40).

Most public servants work more than that average, I work more than that and i'm a public servant.

Take the teachers out and you'd get very different results for the public sector.

The Corinthian

ntlbell wrote: »

i don't think so, people who work hard and do thier job would do well and the lazy shower wouldn't

When I was younger, I would have agreed with you, but life is not so simple. Ultimately, no amount of hard work can eliminate bad luck - people do not seem to realize how important luck is in life. Being in the right place at the right time can mean you will become a millionaire. Being born in a poor family will mean you will need to work that much harder to even break even with someone who was born in more advantageous circumstances. And then there is health - all it takes is a banana skin to put you in a wheelchair and unable to 'work hard'.

One of the reasons that the Darwinistic model is so attractive to many is that we are all convinced that we are special, that our hard work will pay off because of this and that we will not be unlucky. Reality is most of us are not special, and many will have bad luck. But that doesn't stop us thinking that with us it'll be different and buying into something that ultimately will not benefit us. What do you think keeps the US from falling apart socially? It's called the American Dream.

Of course, this does not mean that O'Leary cannot contribute positively to the mess that is the Irish economy. The welfare state that exists in Ireland is a serious disaster which has long encouraged at best meritocracy and at worst parasitic lifestyles. So while I would not let him loose, I would certainly allow him a strong consultative role.

However, a purely Darwinistic approach to the economy won't work either. Citizens are too involved to be treated as simple shareholders and too enfranchised to treat as human resources. So reform the system by all means, but don't kid yourself that hard work alone will rough hew Fortuna.

Kristopherus

I nearly went off the road whem Marion asked him "Would you say Hello Feckless Ditherer if you met Bertie Ahern now" LMAO :D:D:D:D

TimAllen

Barname wrote: »

FAIL

you are wrong. consensus only brought us the bertie bubble

consensus = €100 Billion plus in debt

consensus = a pipe dream, an illusion

this country now requires REAL leadership, to hell with the me feiner whiners.

Whats the FAIL about? You dont seem to understand the concept of democracy - perhaps you should look it up

rugbyman

TimAllen wrote: »

Whats the FAIL about? You dont seem to understand the concept of democracy - perhaps you should look it up

To lead a democratic country, you must have the consent of its citizens - O'Leary would lose that in 5 minutes.

What is this about Tim?

to get to be the leader of a democracy, you need to win an election,or be in place to take over after a govt. falls.
I dont know how this thing abouy O leary becoming a leader of the country came about. if he was to become leader ,he would have had the consent, then how would he lose it in five mins?

i think that the cconcensus of opinion ,other than from those who seem to detest him, is that his talents could be of use to the country

regards,Rugbyman

#15

bridgitt wrote: »

He was brilliant. If only we had someone with an ounce of his common sense in charge. Its great to think as a country we can produce people like him, who has grown the worlds largest airline from humble beginnings , and who pays his taxes in Ireland.

Hi Bridgitt, good to see that you still only appear when Jimmy is banned. :rolleyes:

Have to agree that if Cowen won't listen to MacCarthy, he is unlikely to listen to Michael O'Leary.

ntlbell

The Corinthian wrote: »

When I was younger, I would have agreed with you, but life is not so simple. Ultimately, no amount of hard work can eliminate bad luck - people do not seem to realize how important luck is in life. Being in the right place at the right time can mean you will become a millionaire. Being born in a poor family will mean you will need to work that much harder to even break even with someone who was born in more advantageous circumstances. And then there is health - all it takes is a banana skin to put you in a wheelchair and unable to 'work hard'.

One of the reasons that the Darwinistic model is so attractive to many is that we are all convinced that we are special, that our hard work will pay off because of this and that we will not be unlucky. Reality is most of us are not special, and many will have bad luck. But that doesn't stop us thinking that with us it'll be different and buying into something that ultimately will not benefit us. What do you think keeps the US from falling apart socially? It's called the American Dream.

Of course, this does not mean that O'Leary cannot contribute positively to the mess that is the Irish economy. The welfare state that exists in Ireland is a serious disaster which has long encouraged at best meritocracy and at worst parasitic lifestyles. So while I would not let him loose, I would certainly allow him a strong consultative role.

However, a purely Darwinistic approach to the economy won't work either. Citizens are too involved to be treated as simple shareholders and too enfranchised to treat as human resources. So reform the system by all means, but don't kid yourself that hard work alone will rough hew Fortuna.

I think your doing a bit of a sun sport jouno on my quote.

I'm not suggesting for a moment that do your bit work hard and life will deal you the right cards and that's how life is.

My comment was on an o'learly type running the PS as a buisness, in that if o learly had control of that, the PS workers wouldn't be doing 15 hour shifts and being barley able to survive.

I was suggesting that O'learly would run the PS much like his buisness. his workers are not on terrible wages, but they EARN by WORKING very hard to get those wages, to me that's fair. work hard you get rewards.

compared to the current situation in the PS work hard/be medicore/do nothing is really irrelvant, you'll get your raise.

I was merley suggesting that the PS over olearly would be a fairer place to work and wouldn't mean more work less money.

I agree with your post, it just has nothing to do with what I was referring to, maybe I was unclear.

The Corinthian

ntlbell wrote: »

I think your doing a bit of a sun sport jouno on my quote.

LOL. In fairness I was responding to your post which read like a Sun strapline.

My comment was on an o'learly type running the PS as a buisness, in that if o learly had control of that, the PS workers wouldn't be doing 15 hour shifts and being barley able to survive.

I was suggesting that O'learly would run the PS much like his buisness. his workers are not on terrible wages, but they EARN by WORKING very hard to get those wages, to me that's fair. work hard you get rewards.

I don't know if you can really transfer his employment model to the PS though. Remember, much of the incentive in working hard in Ryanair appears to be tied into sales and the PS is not sales driven, for a start.

That's not to say that injecting some private sector work ethic would be a bad idea - although I would probably start with just giving up in the case of CIE and shutting it down (or shooting a few of their managers and union officials as an example) and starting from scratch / tendering out to the private sector.

Also I'm not entirely convinced by the hyper-Capitalistic labour model either (although I am a bigger fan of it than the Socialist one), but that is another discussion.

murphaph

The Corinthian wrote: »

I don't know if you can really transfer his employment model to the PS though. Remember, much of the incentive in working hard in Ryanair appears to be tied into sales and the PS is not sales driven, for a start.

There are areas in the public sector where it would be very difficult to use Ryanair methods directly, such as in justice, but for example, would it not be a good idea if a revenue investigator could earn a bonus for finding a tax cheat or two? Or a dept. of Social Welfare officer getting a few quid for finding a welfare fraudster?

If a job role can be incentivised like this then maybe it should be? I imagine O'leary's methods could save billions, even without this sort of incentivisation. Didn't O'Leary prohibit the charging of personal mobile phones with Ryanair electricity to save an extra few quid? All these apparently silly measures actually add up. He HATES waste, the public sector wallows in it. He could do a lot more good than harm even if let loose.

ntlbell

The Corinthian wrote: »

LOL. In fairness I was responding to your post which read like a Sun strapline.

It did? Really? by suggesting that that one of Irelands most succesful buisness man might have some better ideas on how to get the best from a work force? tabloid headlines indeed.

The Corinthian wrote: »

I don't know if you can really transfer his employment model to the PS though. Remember, much of the incentive in working hard in Ryanair appears to be tied into sales and the PS is not sales driven, for a start.

That's not to say that injecting some private sector work ethic would be a bad idea - although I would probably start with just giving up in the case of CIE and shutting it down (or shooting a few of their managers and union officials as an example) and starting from scratch / tendering out to the private sector.

Also I'm not entirely convinced by the hyper-Capitalistic labour model either (although I am a bigger fan of it than the Socialist one), but that is another discussion.

Sure you can, I can't think of too many jobs you _can't_ insentiveise (is that a word?)

In my earlier example, do you think if O'Learly hired 8 people to manage IT for 29 people he would allow those 8 people to outsurce their own jobs spend in some cases hundreds of thousands while they sat around playing online games? do you think it would be difficult to monitor the work of those IT "specialists" ?

you're in the mobile/sms/ industry right? or used to be, would that happen under your watch? no? why?

why can't politicians work on a commision/sales model?

you put your manifesto forward, you get voted in, each elected member gets 25k for example.

when each department/item on the manifesto is hit, they get a bonus.

do you think o'learly would allow people to decide their own increases?

allow them to claim exspenses they had no proof of?

allow a politican in kildare explain a days petrol/night in a hotel/breakfast/lunch dinner because he came all the way from kildare to do a days work?

I'm using the term work very loosley

you can apply his ethics in ALMOST all sectors of the PS, there might be SOME sections you have to tinker with it, but it will work.

do more get more.

do nothing get nothing.

this is not some sort of out of leftfield idea, it's how most successufl private sector companys run, yours included (i'm guessing)

Dannyboy83

The Corinthian wrote: »

I don't know if you can really transfer his employment model to the PS though. Remember, much of the incentive in working hard in Ryanair appears to be tied into sales and the PS is not sales driven, for a start.

At the moment, yes.
But, to the best of my understanding, the Dutch healthcare model is a target driven/sales driven service, which is part of what makes it the most cost-efficient in Europe, and apparently the 2nd best.

That's not to say that injecting some private sector work ethic would be a bad idea - although I would probably start with just giving up in the case of CIE and shutting it down (or shooting a few of their managers and union officials as an example) and starting from scratch / tendering out to the private sector.

Yes, I agree with this.
I made the point recently that FAS costs 1 billion per year and the best it can do is to train people for emigration.
FAS should be scrapped and that 1 billion could be used for stimulus spending/employment subsidy (since we don't have any savings to do so).

I guess the business would then have to ensure that workers receive the necessary training/qualifications, rather than handing it back to the state - where it frequently doesn't seem to be done.

Also I'm not entirely convinced by the hyper-Capitalistic labour model either (although I am a bigger fan of it than the Socialist one), but that is another discussion.

Again I agree.
I could only guess as to which areas would benefit and which wouldn't, but some areas of the PS ought not to be privatized (Army, Police, Revenue) others areas, particularly customer focused, could definitely could benefit from some changes.
I don't have sufficient knowledge to know which.

The Corinthian

ntlbell wrote: »

It did? Really? by suggesting that that one of Irelands most succesful buisness man might have some better ideas on how to get the best from a work force? tabloid headlines indeed.

Reducing such a suggestion to a snappy cliché does do that I'm afraid, and you did do that.

In my earlier example, do you think if O'Learly hired 8 people to manage IT for 29 people he would allow those 8 people to outsurce their own jobs spend in some cases hundreds of thousands while they sat around playing online games? do you think it would be difficult to monitor the work of those IT "specialists" ?

I'm not denying that real (as opposed to the laughable lip-service in the PS) benchmarking and targets would not make a difference, however I would not get carried away with Ryanair's 'efficency' either, as they've been known to play it up for marketing reasons. A case in point is in IT - their Web site, which they famously touted in the past as having paid a couple of students a couple of grand to put together. This is true, the Web site was put up by a couple of students a couple of grand - what they tend to not mention is that they paid upwards of a million Punt for the e-commerce functionality on said site.

you're in the mobile/sms/ industry right? or used to be, would that happen under your watch? no? why?

Depends where; in most companies such individuals would get fired. In Newbury, if they knew how to do Powerpoint presentations, they'd probably get promoted.

why can't politicians work on a commision/sales model?

They do. Just not for money, but votes. See where that got us?

do you think o'learly would allow people to decide their own increases?

Depending upon the labour market, he has to upon occasion. Some jobs can dictate their own salaries.

allow them to claim exspenses they had no proof of?

A lot of private sector expense auditing is not exactly at a high standard.

allow a politican in kildare explain a days petrol/night in a hotel/breakfast/lunch dinner because he came all the way from kildare to do a days work?

Well, really the issue there is that such a politician should be fired by his employers - the electorate. Unfortunately, we too easily lose interest. Tribunals are a great device for looking like you're doing something about the problem until the hoi polloi are distracted by something shiny.

you can apply his ethics in ALMOST all sectors of the PS, there might be SOME sections you have to tinker with it, but it will work.

Not really. Remember profit motivation is not what government is supposed to be about - very few areas in the PS actually bring in revenue at all. As I said, that's not to say that some private sector fiscal rectitude should not be introduced - it should - but it does have it's limits.

Darragh29

Sand wrote: »

McCreevy was forced out of government by Bertie because McCreevys unwillingness to cut loose the spending in the manner Bertie and the others in cabinet wanted. Cowen was dropped in as a loyal FF tribalist and the spending began jumping massively with no consideration for sustainability.

Fianna fail is a cult. The sooner people realise that we are dealing with the likes of The Church of Scientology, then the quicker will come our liberation...

EnigmasWhisper

bridgitt wrote: »

He was brilliant. If only we had someone with an ounce of his common sense in charge. Its great to think as a country we can produce people like him, who has grown the worlds largest airline from humble beginnings , and who pays his taxes in Ireland.

Oh right, so thats the same guy who did a U turn on the Lisbon treaty so as to get a free ride into Air Lingus and cheaper labour in the future ? I might add 90% of his staff are Eastern European

Head The Wall

The Corinthian wrote: »

Remember profit motivation is not what government is supposed to be about - very few areas in the PS actually bring in revenue at all. As I said, that's not to say that some private sector fiscal rectitude should not be introduced - it should - but it does have it's limits.

The governmennt doesn't have to turn a profit but it should spend as wisely as possible and we know it doesn't do that

The Corinthian

Head The Wall wrote: »

The governmennt doesn't have to turn a profit but it should spend as wisely as possible and we know it doesn't do that

True, but that is not the same thing as profit maximization, which is the basic premise of an enterprise's motivation in Capitalist microeconomics.

I am not suggesting that O'Leary or his peers have nothing to contribute or that the PS should not adopt a large swathe of private sector practices, only that these cannot simply be applied to the PS, as the model is always going to be different, down to the basic purpose of the PS and that relying simply upon a work ethic ignores the fact that life is a little bit more complex.

Dr Galen

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

At the moment, yes.
But, to the best of my understanding, the Dutch healthcare model is a target driven/sales driven service, which is part of what makes it the most cost-efficient in Europe, and apparently the 2nd best.

not really tbh. Yes there are targets etc involved, but in the way your suggesting. Simply put, the government doesn't really provide healthcare services to the population, it purchases them on behalf of the population from the private sector.

It gets more complicated when you factor in the different insurance policies involved, the profit and not for profit health care providers etc etc.

Diarmuid

EnigmasWhisper wrote: »

Oh right, so thats the same guy who did a U turn on the Lisbon treaty

No. He repeatedly refused to say which way he voted on the first treaty. That's not a u turn.

invincibleirish

O' Leary inspires the same kind of sentiment from his fans in middle Ireland that Charles Haughey did. To hell with his idiosyncracies and quirks, 'he gets the job done' and doesn't take ****. Like Brody Sweeney, Reynolds and others before them, being a successful businessmen does not make a good politician!, the last thing Irish politics needs is more cult of personality leaders.

silverharp

here is my summary view, the market works , gov. regulation doesnt work and any system where there is too much of a distance between the payment for services and the supply of services will tend to lead to sub optimal solutions namely excessive gov. , laws and low quality services.
The welfare state is generally sold on the basis having a safety net for the bottom 10% depending how you define it, after that people should be asking for themselves are they getting a good deal? Are people to be treated as so irresponsible that they cant be trusted to fund their own education and health needs for example? wouldnt we have better services if we had more control over the services we consume?

97i9y3941

to give o leary his due,im sure he would turn around the country and probably do a thatcher and break the unions,and dont say he would make the country worse off,there was already a poverty trap in ireland during the so called "boom"

craichoe

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

At the moment, yes.
But, to the best of my understanding, the Dutch healthcare model is a target driven/sales driven service, which is part of what makes it the most cost-efficient in Europe, and apparently the 2nd best.

Damn more expensive than Ireland though, my premium for basic health insurance is 1150 euros for the year and thats the mandatory legal minimum when working and its pretty much the same price across the board for 'zorgverzekering'

Seems to be quite good though when you need to use it.

Diarmuid

craichoe wrote: »

Damn more expensive than Ireland though, my premium for basic health insurance is 1150 euros for the year and thats the mandatory legal minimum when working and its pretty much the same price across the board for 'zorgverzekering'

Seems to be quite good though when you need to use it.

Well in Ireland if you are single, 35 years old, earning €40k you will pay:
VHI - €795
Health insurance - €1600

You can decide if you are getting value for money or not.

glynn888

just let him loose in any hospital . all you need is a pair of eyes to see all the overpaid wasters swanning around doing nothing and geting away with it.
how can we justify paying people 1000 euros a week to push trolleys around.

joa00001

I have been saying this to all the people I have spoke to that Michael O'Leary type is needed! The biggest mistake in my opinion is the minimum wage. We use to be brought up that if you worked hard you got paid well and if you didn't you didn't! Now (no offence intended !) if you stand on the road with a stop/go sign your employer has been told to pay you the minimum of over €17 per hour (general operative CIF). These crazy rates have meant that people think they have more money in their pay packet when really everything goes up in price to pay for peoples employment and they are worse off at the end! Social Welfare is then increased so dependants can afford to live with increased prices. Businesses leave Ireland because labour is so expensive and then the government increase our VAT so that we travel over the border for cheaper prices instead of having the north come to us !
The Government/public service creates a lot of buracrasy for small companies to discourage them and too many rules to make them efficent. The waste in the civil service can be seen by the amount of paper work small firms have to do and I think that this is only to create work for civil services ie; CSO, NERA, CIF, AUDITS, ect.

By the way I was so annoyed at the goverment I sent them an email from their site outlining my points making clear I would never vote for them again and got an email back- thanking me for my continued support and becoming a supporter of their party!!!! They never even read it!!!

irish_bob

joa00001 wrote: »

I have been saying this to all the people I have spoke to that Michael O'Leary type is needed! The biggest mistake in my opinion is the minimum wage. We use to be brought up that if you worked hard you got paid well and if you didn't you didn't! Now (no offence intended !) if you stand on the road with a stop/go sign your employer has been told to pay you the minimum of over €17 per hour (general operative CIF). These crazy rates have meant that people think they have more money in their pay packet when really everything goes up in price to pay for peoples employment and they are worse off at the end! Social Welfare is then increased so dependants can afford to live with increased prices. Businesses leave Ireland because labour is so expensive and then the government increase our VAT so that we travel over the border for cheaper prices instead of having the north come to us !
The Government/public service creates a lot of buracrasy for small companies to discourage them and too many rules to make them efficent. The waste in the civil service can be seen by the amount of paper work small firms have to do and I think that this is only to create work for civil services ie; CSO, NERA, CIF, AUDITS, ect.

By the way I was so annoyed at the goverment I sent them an email from their site outlining my points making clear I would never vote for them again and got an email back- thanking me for my continued support and becoming a supporter of their party!!!! They never even read it!!!

the goverment and the public service do not create beauracracy for the purpose of discouraging small business , they create beauracracy in order to maximise employment in the public service , the result is the same though , it hinders business

westtip

+1 spot on
The issue is not benchmarking an inefficiently designed system or cutting pay - its cutting back the entire system and starting from scratch.

We have a political and public administration system established in the 19th century - it needs to be totally overhauled to suit a modern society

jimmmy

They would set up another quango to look in to that. Millions of euro later, nothing would change. They commissioned the McCarthy report, but did not act on it.

Keano

I've certain respect for O'Leary and he would no doubt be a good advisor on certain issues but please Michael, stop giving out about levies, your airline will charge us to have a window seat next.

jimmmy

Keano A Legend wrote: »

I've certain respect for O'Leary and he would no doubt be a good advisor on certain issues but please Michael, stop giving out about levies, your airline will charge us to have a window seat next.

His flights are still cheap - at the moment I saw advertised he is selling a million seats for a tenner each. If he charges for a window seat , then sit by the aisle. Thank God for O'Leary + Ryanair. If it were not for him then who knowns what the Air Lingus would be charging now. They charged a few hunded quid 30 years ago just to fly to England. Their ( Air Lingus ) attitude then , as they were highly unionised + in a monopoly situation, remind me of the public service now.

P. Breathnach

jimmmy wrote: »

His flights are still cheap - at the moment I saw advertised he is selling a million seats for a tenner each. If he charges for a window seat , then sit by the aisle. Thank God for O'Leary + Ryanair. If it were not for him then who knowns what the Air Lingus would be charging now. They charged a few hunded quid 30 years ago just to fly to England. Their ( Air Lingus ) attitude then , as they were highly unionised + in a monopoly situation, remind me of the public service now.

It wasn't Ryanair that broke the Aer Lingus/BA cartel. It was the EU: public servants serving the public.