Does Ireland need a Thatcher?

oppenheimer1

So our public finances are in a mess, is mass privitisation the answer? Would it be feasible to sell off Water/Waste/Health/Transport to a private entity to run?

Just looking at the health service, instead of having a publically funded one, how about we make health insurance compulsory and sell off the hospitals, and make them compete with one another?

Irish Thatcher might also choose to introduce a Council Tax which would give local authorities the ability to generate their own revenue.

Would such ideas work here? I have a feeling the government will be "selling the family silver" in the next few years in any case...

Liam Byrne

Absolutely not!

Part of the reason that phone and broadband are so expensive here is because of the hair-brained idea to privatise eircom.

People are overpaying for EVERYTHING in this country, be it public or private, and as a result people have to charge more, which means their customers are charging more, etc.

And need I remind anyone that the banks were private organisations ?

What we have in place could work if it weren't for corruption, and would require some goodwill and proper, social-focused, regulation.

Capt'n Midnight

There is this cottage with a reed roof that looks a bit rundown...


IIRC Thatcherism was about selling cemetries for a pound, Dennis had a lot of investments that benefited from high interest rates. The UK was kept afloat during the demise of manafacturing industry by Scottish oil, £600Bn and precious little to show for it.

People have long memories, Eircom was killing off the golden goose. It was fattened for years before, we had direct dial before most other parts of europe, part of the reasone we lagged in BB was the amount of network that had been already upgraded to a lower standard. Had that money not been pumped in the exchanges would have been up later when BB gear was around. I'm sure someone can tell you how many times eircom has been asset stripped, what % of phone lines are paid for by welfare, how if you get a phone line from anyone else Eircom still get a kick back that's higher than line rental + BB in most other countries.

Privitasatioin is just stealth tax, look at the bin collections

Dannyboy83

Fine Gael are aiming to sell off the companies for a profit to be re-invested back into the recovery/stimulus, except they will keep the infrastructure.
They actually highlight Eircom as the way not to do it.

They seem to have plans for massive investment into infrastructure, fibre optic being one they have highlighted.

TBH, I can't wait until they get into power.
I think things will come back up way faster than anybody expects if FG get a majority.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Joey the lips

This was done before... Belive me ireland does not need a thatcher. She will be the only bitch whos death will be celebrated in the uk when she finally dies.

bleg

We need Angie Merkel!!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Eliot Rosewater

Definitely not. I oppose Margaret Thatcher for some reason that is unknown to me. I never consider her point of view in anything close to detail. I usually just pluck an easy-to-attack concept out of thin air, attribute it to her, and then assault it head on. This satisfies the aforementioned desire to oppose her, without running the risk of finding out about the things she actually stands for.

In the upcoming discussion some people may claim Thatcher taking on the domineering Unions of the 70's resulted in the overall betterment of the economy. This is completely and totally wrong, for two reasons:

1. I have a predisposition to support workers rights even if it involves dragging the whole country into an economic black hole. Thus closing down inefficient industries is wrong.
2. I have a predisposition to oppose her, as above, which makes everything else she does wrong.

doc_17

Yeah Thatcher. Try selling that to to the IRISH public, Ask the british the following "do you want her back" and see what response you get

Joey the lips

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yeah right... TBH i dont have the time or patience to discuss a bitch like her. I hate her and all she stands for. Futhermore she did not just ruin arther scargyl(mis spell) her lies ruined a part of his life which he attested to on the late late.

Just look at slusk's posts s/he agrees with the op.

I consider myself religious... However I live for the day that history judges Margret thatcher and indeed Ronald Regan as two of the biggest tyrants of there time. although pinochet loves her... I wonder why...

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

johno2

If we're looking to the 80's to solve our problems, I'll take Garret Fitzgerald. He had a rare streak of honesty in Irish politics, and he has more experience than any other Irish politician at cleaning up FFs messes.

johno

danman

johno2 wrote: »

If we're looking to the 80's to solve our problems, I'll take Garret Fitzgerald. He had a rare streak of honesty in Irish politics, and he has more experience than any other Irish politician at cleaning up FFs messes.

johno

Bejesus, don't let Leo hear you saying that....!!!!!

northwest100

donegalfella wrote:

This post has been deleted.

they weren't tyrants, they were just puppets of US banks.

who the hell would be stupid enough to believe Ronald Regan... a hollywood actor, B-movie actor in fact.. would be capable of running a country?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTcL6Xc_eMM

banks run countries donegalfella, not the governments nor hollywood actors for that matter..sorry to disappoint you.

and if you're in favour of banks running a country like a corporation, why not move to the US? i'm sure your life would be much easier than it is here..

Joey the lips

johno2 wrote: »

If we're looking to the 80's to solve our problems, I'll take Garret Fitzgerald. He had a rare streak of honesty in Irish politics, and he has more experience than any other Irish politician at cleaning up FFs messes.

johno

Michael lowry agrees with you....:rolleyes:

southsiderosie

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

DF, you consistently rail against Ireland's "big government", but big compared to what? Public spending on social welfare as a % of GDP is relatively low by OECD standards. For example:

* In 1980 public spending was 16.7% of GDP, putting Ireland above the OECD average - and at #14 overall it was tied with Thatcher's Britain.

* By 1990, public spending fell to 14.9% of GDP, putting it below both Britain and the OECD average (at #18)

* By 2000, at which point economic growth was booming, public spending was only 13.6% of GDP, putting Ireland at #27 overall. This was not only below the UK and the OECD average, but also below the US.

* By 2005, Ireland was back up to #22, with public spending at 16.7% of GDP: the same level it was at 25 years earlier.

The problem in Ireland isn't big government, it's bad government. Another problem is the relatively passive populace, that has never shown itself to be price-sensitive in the market, or corruption-sensitive in the public sector; voting with your feet seems pretty rare in Ireland.

Finally, if anyone thinks the folks in power wouldn't privatize everything to the benefit of a golden circle rather than consumers, there's a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you...You're asking for Thatcher, but what you'd end up with would be closer to Yeltsin.

silverharp

one minor point SS , GDP flatters this economy compared to other countries due to transfer pricing and other activity due to multinationals.

the size of the gov. is only one factor though. FF FG and labour have presided over interfering in the economy to such an extent that the gov. actually has an opinion over how many hotels should be developed and have taken money off me in the form of tax to fund every hair brained scheme that came along

mike65

southsiderosie wrote: »

The problem in Ireland isn't big government, it's bad government. Another problem is the relatively passive populace, that has never shown itself to be price-sensitive in the market, or corruption-sensitive in the public sector; voting with your feet seems pretty rare in Ireland.

Finally, if anyone thinks the folks in power wouldn't privatize everything to the benefit of a golden circle rather than consumers, there's a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you...You're asking for Thatcher, but what you'd end up with would be closer to Yeltsin.

+1 to all this. The Irish public sector* is essentially corrupt and we are not willing to change it. It exists to serve itself. Mrs T was merely the figurehead anyway, it was Sir Keith Joseph who was the brains of the ideology. Apart from having the will to change the status quo you need to find someone who has got an alternative vision. No-one in Irish politics seems capable of doing "the vision thing".


*I'm refering to senior management/mandarins and their "political masters", who are actually slaves

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

doc_17

And why did it increase to such levels.....

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

hiorta

Privatising such National services would inevitably remove all Irish control of them from the Irish taxpayer - is this a good idea?
An intelligent and competent Opposition should do their jobs fearlessly, if working for the greater National interest.

johno2

Joey the lips wrote: »

Michael lowry agrees with you....:rolleyes:

Could you expand on that please. I don't understand what you mean. Lowry was just getting into politics as Fitzgerald was retiring.

johno

population

Another "Does Ireland need a Thatcher" thread???

Well all i can say is that Ireland needs a dose of salts run through it. Thatcher was not averse to doing questionable things with government money to greatly enrich her and her inner circle. We have already had quite enough characters like that here thank you very much.

We need sensible, honest and above all accountable politicians and public servants.

southsiderosie

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

But taking this at face value, Irish public spending looked almost exactly like Britain in 2008, even though Britain experienced massive privatization in the 1980s. So if the primary reason behind a Thatcherite-type policy reform is to reduce a "bloated" public sector, it's not clear from the graph that it would actually achieve anything significant, since British public spending is close to the EU average.

However, I'm not totally comfortable taking this at face value, since one could argue that 2008-09 are, in the greater scheme of things, outlier years. I'd be curious to see what other countries look like besides Ireland in 2009, especially the Mediterranean countries.

Finally, going back to the Eurostat data that Ronan Lyons referenced (in the comments section of the post):




Ireland has consistently lagged behind the "big" economies of the EU-15 as well as the other 'PIGS' in terms of public spending as a % of GDP. Yes, some of this is explained by the GDP/GNP difference, but again, even under the first graph, Ireland is at best two percentage points off of the EU average.

Like I said before, I don't think privatization is the answer to Ireland's problems. I would agree that less government regulation of SMALL businesses is necessary, as well as a truly independent financial regulator WITH TEETH for large enterprises, reform to bankruptcy laws, development of whistleblower protection laws, introduction of "sunshine laws" for public officials, and a REAL PUNATIVE PERJURY LAW. Any massive privatization program without these basic backround regulations in place would simply be a giveaway to government cronies.

Shelflife

We dont need Thatcher but we do need someone with balls and vision, someone who can see beyond 4-5 years , someone who can see investment now as something that will save money down the road, someone who will make public servants accountable for the monies that they spend.

simple things like investing in breast checks , cervical smear tests , prostate and cholesterol tests while expensive now will save fortunes down the road.

we dont need to privatise anything we just need to run the services that we have better.

we need balls, vision, accountability and honesty,

Capt'n Midnight

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

[*]I have a predisposition to support workers rights even if it involves dragging the whole country into an economic black hole. Thus closing down inefficient industries is wrong.

Actually a lot of closures of loss making mines did not save the government money, because it cost more to pay the unemployment benefits of the miners and the knock on effect on others who depended on the mines.

It was political not economic.

And the NUM were nuts to go ahead with a strike when there was 18 months of coal stockpilled

Most of the reduction in unemployment during the Tories reign was by massaging statistics by stuff like redefining people as job seekers, excluding those on ytp schemes. Out of about 20 changes to the definitions only one or two increased the figures.

dlofnep

Eliot you big blagard!

I genuinely dislike Thatcher - her actions during the hunger-strikes genuinely angers me and often fuels many anti-Thatcherites. But since this is a seperate issue, I will address the qualms of I have with her in the context of the current discussion.

I disagree with Thatcher on a number of issues. Thatcher was about the individual, rather than society working together for the betterment of each other - as she outlined in her "there is no such thing as society" speech. many people who lived under the rule of Maggie Thatcher have genuine grievances with how she acted.

She was anti-safety net. There is a big difference between discouragement of welfare dependency, and directly opposing the principles of a welfare state. Society is unequal, and I feel that certain circumstances can only overcome with assistance. Under the control of Thatcher, the poverty line grew larger with nearly 1 in 3 children falling under the poverty line. The rich got richer, and the poor got poorer. Inequality also grew rapidly under Thatcher's control.

These are not the product of good Government in my opinion.

Capt'n Midnight

southsiderosie wrote: »

Like I said before, I don't think privatization is the answer to Ireland's problems. I would agree that less government regulation of SMALL businesses is necessary, as well as a truly independent financial regulator WITH TEETH for large enterprises, reform to bankruptcy laws, development of whistleblower protection laws, introduction of "sunshine laws" for public officials, and a REAL PUNATIVE PERJURY LAW. Any massive privatization program without these basic backround regulations in place would simply be a giveaway to government cronies.

Very roughly we value a human life at one million, in terms of money spent by the HSE / RSA to prevent deaths.

Where fraud / deception results in a loss in revenue of this sort of scale people die , it is that simple.

Our justice system needs to investigate and in cases of probable guild prosecute accordingly.

Eliot Rosewater

dlofnep wrote: »

Eliot you big blagard!

Tbh, I think that people here have such differing ideas about what the Government should and should not do that no middle-ground can be found, and talking about it will be close to useless!


As regards the hunger strikes, I think this is probably the source of the underlying "hatred" of Thatcher in Ireland.