Insiders vs Outsiders (are we being manipulated?)

Brussels Sprout

These were terms coined by David McWilliams in his book "Follow the Money" to describe the factions that are being drawn in Irish society. He brings it up again in his latest article:

The insiders are those who have a stake in the society and, therefore, will support a government that is taking decisions that protect their dwindling stake. The insiders prefer the certainty of a tarnished status quo to risking the unknown of a rejuvenated country.

The outsiders are those with no stake in the society, who therefore have most interest in fundamental change. During the boom, some outsiders got inside the tent for a few years, but now they are back outside, in negative equity. They are likely to emigrate or go on the dole as they dutifully did in the crises of the 1950s and the 1980s.

The cynicism of the current approach is that it gives a political party, which is playing the percentages, a chance. On the other hand, it means the recession is longer than it should be. Credit dries up and the country is fixed in a holding position, which is sustainable as long as the Government can borrow abroad and the insiders are kept in a state of nervous anxiety rather than acute fear about their future. This allows the insiders to see the outsiders as, at best, a worrisome nuisance and, at worst, a threat to the insiders’ standard of living. The outsiders quickly become the enemy.

Playing the insider/outsider game allows the ruling party to experiment with what could be described as “ground hurling”. Ground hurling means you keep close to your marker, don’t do anything dramatic and see how the ball breaks. Ground hurling allows a team that shouldn’t have a hope in hell to eke out a win and rob the prize.

Do you think the government is pitting us against each other?



(you can read the full article here)

ei.sdraob

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Do you think the government is pitting us against each other?

I think DMcW should stop writing ****


btw whats the picture meant to represent?

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

are we being manipulated?

by whom? the government??

you give them to much credit so, they've shown time and time again to me incapable of anything

/

gandalf

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Do you think the government is pitting us against each other?

Do you honestly think the crowd in power or the dopes waiting on the sidelines have it in them to orchestrate anything at all.

The problem at the moment is that we need to overhaul our whole government and the way we deliver public services. Its been needed for years but we have not had the politicians capable of doing this. What we have are people with a vision that only encompasses getting re-elected in 5 years and staying on the gravy train and only governing with this in mind.

Brussels Sprout

deadtiger wrote: »

Do you honestly think the crowd in power or the dopes waiting on the sidelines have it in them to orchestrate anything at all.

Honestly, no I do not.

I agree completely though that these two groups are emerging and it's to nobodies benefit. When different parts of the workforce start fighting each other publicly with the media cheering them on then it takes the focus off of the government and I think they are enjoying the respite.

ei.sdraob

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Honestly, no I do not.

I agree completely though that these two groups are emerging and it's to nobodies benefit. When different parts of the workforce start fighting each other publicly with the media cheering them on then it takes the focus off of the government and I think they are enjoying the respite.

it is not as simple as public/private war

once again DMcW dumbs down things too much and misses the big picture

as was recently mentioned in a parallel thread (by Sleepy i believe) there are many groups trying to lobby for their members (unions,ibec,farmers,builders,bankers) all trying to screw everybody else for the gain of their group


and yes YOU are being manipulated

by David McWilliams,
in starting this thread and linking to his site you give him more exposure and more people then would go and buy his books, hes one of the people who is profiting from the doom and gloom (fair play)

peasant

Oh God ...how I would LOVE to be manipulated !

Because that would mean that somebody out there actually had an inkling of what is going on and a plan on how to deal with it.

But no such luck ...we're not being manipulated, we're just being bungled, lied to, cheated and fleeced as always.

Brussels Sprout

ei.sdraob wrote: »

it is not as simple as public/private war

once again DMcW dumbs down things too much and misses the big picture

as was recently mentioned in a parallel thread (by Sleepy i believe) there are many groups trying to lobby for their members (unions,ibec,farmers,builders,bankers) all trying to screw everybody else for the gain of their group


and yes YOU are being manipulated

by David McWilliams,
in starting this thread and linking to his site you give him more exposure and more people then would go and buy his books, hes one of the people who is profiting from the doom and gloom (fair play)

I never mentioned public/private. That is just a subsection of the insider/outsider conflict.

I don't really understand your disdain for McWilliams. He gets knocked by a lot of people in this country even though he has been proved correct in his assessments many times before. Perhaps I am not as cynical as you but I do believe that he cares about this country and its future and it pains him to see the state we are in and the path we are going down. (I also think you overestimate the amount of money there is to be made form the irish book market)

ei.sdraob

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

I never mentioned public/private. That is just a subsection of the insider/outsider conflict.

I don't really understand your disdain for McWilliams. He gets knocked by a lot of people in this country even though he has been proved correct in his assessments many times before. Perhaps I am not as cynical as you but I do believe that he cares about this country and its future and it pains him to see the state we are in and the path we are going down. (I also think you overestimate the amount of money there is to be made form the irish book market)

My disdain is simple, he treats people as if they are stupid (in hindsight maybe they are) in the manner he writes (im not saying that he is stupid himself, if anything i find him to be quite manipulative at times)

and in his "rants" he always takes the "shallow" populist viewpoint while failing to provide any real insight or analysis in order to score a few sound-bytes, and quite often contradicts himself between articles (example calling for bank bailouts while now writing how were being screwed, no **** sherlock! ironically he was an ex banker himself...)

and then of course his constant going ons on how he was "the only one" who warned about a crash, which is rather annoying as its just a plain lie

he aint an economist but a journalist and all his rantings are aimed squarely at doing one thing, selling more books and getting him public appearances and painting himself as some sort of oracle, tell me this what is he predicting will happen in 1-5 years in Ireland? the dog on the street could tell you that we will crash but right now were more interested in how and what manner we exit this hole were digging

Byron85

ei.sdraob wrote: »

he aint an economist but a journalist

I presume your C.V is better than his?

"Between 1990 and 1993 he worked as an economist at the Central Bank of Ireland.[6] At 27, McWilliams moved to London to work at UBS in emerging markets analysis.[7] [8] At the ages of 30-31, still in London, McWilliams worked for Banque Nationale de Paris.[9] From 1999 to 2002, he was an emerging markets strategist with a New York-based hedge fund, Rockwest Capital.[10]"

Obviously he's not an economist. That Degree in Economics from Trinners was obviously a Journalism Degree. :rolleyes:

Liam Byrne

The outsiders are those with no stake in the society, who therefore have most interest in fundamental change.

I know he's an economist, but I'd argue that the outsiders have a much bigger stake in society in real terms; it's just not monetary.

The insiders can swan off in their jets to their second homes (and in most cases already have, as tax exiles).

Brussels Sprout

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I know he's an economist, but I'd argue that the outsiders have a much bigger stake in society in real terms; it's just not monetary.

The insiders can swan off in their jets to their second homes (and in most cases already have, as tax exiles).

The insiders are not just the elite-in his book he defines them as a much broader group:

The insiders are the Establishment, the professional classes, the broad public sector and those who work for large secure corporations. They include the media marketing and the professional service sectors. In a crisis like the 1980s, they become poor versions of the European middle classes, taxed heavily but ultimately still with a stake in our society. They have a decent network and the old Irish gelling agent of 'pull' and 'who you know' prevent s them slipping precipitously downwards in the recession.

In contrast the outsiders include the poorly educated, the unconnected small business people, startup entrepreneurs, the young and the unemployed. These people tend not to have a strong foothold in society and many tens of thousands emigrate. The insider/outsider dilemma in Ireland is not solely a class issue issue and it would be wrong to see it as this. For example, many of Ireland's emigrants in the 1980s were considerably more educated than those who stayed behind.

Insiders have too much to lose by leaving. Outsiders are the opposite; they have nothing to lose by heading off and not too much to gain from hanging around. The poorer outsiders become the long-term unemployed. The insider/outsider phenomenon comes down to how significant your stake is in our society.

We saw in the 1950s and again in the 1980s the way society splits. The insiders protect what they have on the basis that it's better to have a bit of a shrinking pie than to have no pie at all. Typically, the way they protect their position is to keep the outsiders out.

As the recession gets worse, this insider/outsider divide will become more obvious.

He goes on then to say how insiders oppose radical reform that would be to the benefit of everyone because of the immediate impact it would have on their interests so that in the long run everyone loses out.

P. Breathnach

So society involves contest between interest groups? I didn't have McWilliams down as a Marxist.

ei.sdraob

T.W.H Byron wrote: »

I presume your C.V is better than his?

"Between 1990 and 1993 he worked as an economist at the Central Bank of Ireland.[6] At 27, McWilliams moved to London to work at UBS in emerging markets analysis.[7] [8] At the ages of 30-31, still in London, McWilliams worked for Banque Nationale de Paris.[9] From 1999 to 2002, he was an emerging markets strategist with a New York-based hedge fund, Rockwest Capital.[10]"

Obviously he's not an economist. That Degree in Economics from Trinners was obviously a Journalism Degree. :rolleyes:

way to try to twist what i was trying to say (btw i did get further in academia than this guy, and worked for a few large companies in my time)

i was trying to say that hes not an "economic expert" as he makes himself out to be but a writer who regularly puts out populist pieces that some people swallow without thinking about it

he makes himself out to be an "expert" and is often hailed as such, but in reality if you read his books and articles hes more of an "observer" with a knack for dumbing things down (in some cases overdoing it)


i wouldn't call him an economist since he never went into academia and done proper research and that shows in his ramblings, but he is a good writer with an ability to dumb down things to the level of common people using flowery imagery and more importantly self-whore himself and sell books

i reserve the name "economist" for people like Prof Morgan Kelly, people who are in research and are not tied to companies or banks and/or pimping themselves in order to sell more books

* when was the last time he published a paper?
* performed an experiment?
* collected and analyzed data?
* backed up his "ideas" (often borrowed from other people) with references and hard data??


my problem is not with him (as i said fairplay to him for making money out of this crisis) but with people who believe him to be some sort of an expert or oracle without thinking much about what he writes and swallowing it whole

/

ssaye

David McWilliams, Eddie Hobbs, ESRI, whover, all these experts earn 6 figure salaries telling us we are hopeless with our finances. Everyone stop listening to them, 1.2.3...NOW

jimmycrackcorm

ssaye wrote: »

David McWilliams, Eddie Hobbs, ESRI, whover, all these experts earn 6 figure salaries telling us we are hopeless with our finances. Everyone stop listening to them, 1.2.3...NOW

Yes, because Boards posters make so much more sense...

Guell72

ssaye wrote: »

David McWilliams, Eddie Hobbs, ESRI, whover, all these experts earn 6 figure salaries telling us we are hopeless with our finances. Everyone stop listening to them, 1.2.3...NOW

Now everybody, re-mortgage your houses so you are in debt up to your eyeballs so you can invest in the stock markets which only ever go up, or buy some of my houses in Cape Verde from me. Thanks for listening, Im Eddie Hobbs.

ei.sdraob

Guell72 wrote: »

Now everybody, re-mortgage your houses so you are in debt up to your eyeballs so you can invest in the stock markets which only ever go up, or buy some of my houses in Cape Verde from me. Thanks for listening, Im Eddie Hobbs.

hehe that guy

be weary of people who try to sell "gold" as an investment

thebman

ssaye wrote: »

David McWilliams, Eddie Hobbs, ESRI, whover, all these experts earn 6 figure salaries telling us we are hopeless with our finances. Everyone stop listening to them, 1.2.3...NOW

One thing to remember about these people is they have reasonable sized audiences (more so the same type of person in the UK or America).

Does anybody think maybe they invest in something and then go on tv and when asked say, <insert investment here> is where I'd put my money (as they have) knowing a bunch of people will likely invest in it after they hype it then sell it off for a nice profit?

Liam Byrne

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

He goes on then to say how insiders oppose radical reform that would be to the benefit of everyone because of the immediate impact it would have on their interests so that in the long run everyone loses out.

Then it's phrased wrong; they've no stake in "society", they've a stake in their own interests.

InReality

P. Breathnach wrote: »

So society involves contest between interest groups? I didn't have McWilliams down as a Marxist.

How does that make him a Marxist ?

I don't think that idea is solely a Marxist or even Left wing one.

Does it not have a good deal of explanatory value in the current Irish situation ?

dunsandin

Mcw et al are a bit like met eireann - "It rained yesterday, it rained earlier today,ooh look, its raining outside now. It might rain tonight.It was nice in Spain today.Whats that, what will it be like next week??Er, well, um, our best guesstimate is.....rain maybe, or not, sure who can tell......", all delivered in an authoritative tone, while looking suave and expertly.
As someone once said, if you lined up every economist in the world end to end, you still wouldn't reach a conclusion.

CDfm

P. Breathnach wrote: »

So society involves contest between interest groups? I didn't have McWilliams down as a Marxist.

He is stating the bloody obvious and making up new names for old theories. He also does not develop the idea.

Now what he doesnt say is what to do. He does not say that these interest groups get pots of money in grant aid.

Like what is the financial cost to the us the taxpayer of the government funding these interest groups.

McWilliams would love to be an insider and I agree with those who say he is a journalist rather than an economist.

It would be nice to see Mcwilliams make policy suggestions on Public Service pay and the unions and explain the economic policies of the various political parties to us.

He doesnt do that.

Come on Dave come up with some solutions.