"Austerity" or "normality"?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

KindOfIrish

Great post. I agree 100%

whatawaster

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I agree, but relative to the last decade the next ten years are going to be tough and a major, though necessary, shock. It isn't going to be easy foe every family to adjust, because a lot of expenditure, such as mortgage costs, will actually go up in the next few years while their incomes drop.

Leiva

KindOfIrish wrote: »

Great post. I agree 100%

If :
- €85 billion worth of debt over 7rs
-Unemployment to reach 15%
-Mortgage defaults to hit 8%

Is "normality" then give me a different country any day .

sollar

Your probably right and what make it all the more difficult is that people have built their lives around these higher wages. We will find it quite painful as living standards fall and prices reluctantly fall to reflect this new reality.

The time between our wages falling and the shops/services etc realising this new reality and dropping their prices accordingly will be tough.

SkepticOne

So donegalfella, you are happy about the higher taxes that we'll have for the forseable future. Thought your we're against all that?

Or would it be true to say that rather than have people pay taxes, what you want is for things to come to a head so that there will be a default and that this will force a dramatic restructuring not only of debt but radically change government?

Would it also be true to say that you are attracted to our membership of the Euro because it specificically helps bring about this collapse?

I've no problem with these views but you should be more open about them. Airing them is the best thing rather than try to hide them.

Hayte

I think that there is a very big problem with thinking in terms of averages because the gap between rich and poor is huge and widening. The average may be higher than the rest of the EU but there is still dire poverty here. Its just offset by those with excessive wealth. Call it austerity of normality as you wish but its the people under the poverty line (and those who will be put under the poverty line by the austerity cuts) that are cause for concern.

whatawaster

SkepticOne wrote: »

So donegalfella, you are happy about the higher taxes that we'll have for the forseable future. Thought your we're against all that?

Or would it be true to say that rather than have people pay taxes, what you want is for things to come to a head so that there will be a default and that this will force a dramatic restructuring not only of debt but radically change government?

Would it also be true to say that you are attracted to our membership of the Euro because it specificically helps bring about this collapse?

I've no problem with these views but you should be more open about them. Airing them is the best thing rather than try to hide them.

The reason we're going to have such high taxes is because none of the parties have the guts to push through the expenditure cuts to give us a sustainable but competitive base for the future.

Tipp Man

Great post DonegalFella

It is very easy to give money to people, its much harder to take it back from them once they become accustomed to it, thats our main problem

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Japer

Its austerity for many self employed / people in the private sector, and for some of the lower paid people in the public sector who may have mortgages etc. For a lot of people, people who have fixed salaries rather than being self employed or on commission, things were never so good. Some people are on annual salaries which would buy two apartments in rural Ireland. As prices have fallen, people can get huge value for money.

As the English politician said on Brendan O'Connors tv show the other night, if she lived in Ireland + wrote a book she would not have to pay tax on it. Her friends / relatives who are old age pensioners get less than half in the UK compared to here. The Dole is more than double in Ireland compared to UK. Public sector wages, inc politicians wages, are still much higher in Ireland than in UK. Austerity ? The IMF has not done anything yet, relatively speaking.

Inquitus

The problem is that alot of peoples costs are fixed and as mentioned above, mortgages along with energy costs etc will likely rise. Its all well and good to point out that the past was unsustainable, but people only have a limited ability to cut their cloth according to their new lower means. When you drastically move the goalposts on people, as we have done, you run the risk of putting people in financial trouble. If I found I could no longer afford my mortgage on my 3000 sq ft home, I would not be able to sell it, clear my mortgage and find a new house more in line with my financial situation.

Simply put with the negative equity timebomb alot of people are not able to reduce their costs, this constraint is the main issue here. Peoples main cost in life is something they can do nothing to reduce.

dan_d

Wholly and completely agree.

ei.sdraob

Some things are returning to normality,

but the debt that was took on (at all levels) during the boom, will hang around the necks of everyone (even the ones who avoided being sucked into the herd ) for a long time.

Tipp Man

Hayte wrote: »

I think that there is a very big problem with thinking in terms of averages because the gap between rich and poor is huge and widening. The average may be higher than the rest of the EU but there is still dire poverty here. Its just offset by those with excessive wealth. Call it austerity of normality as you wish but its the people under the poverty line (and those who will be put under the poverty line by the austerity cuts) that are cause for concern.

You haven't travelled much if you think there is still dire poverty in this country - but then that sums it up. The expectations of the people are too high and anybody without a few holidays and a 42 inch flat screen must be in poverty.

Leiva

DonegalFella,

I take your point but this :

We convinced ourselves that people with unimpressive educations and average incomes deserve to own lavish 3,000-square-foot houses, drive new cars, take three foreign holidays a year, and invite 400 guests to their weddings—because they're Irish.

..is going to the extremes , not that its not true but such people would be in a minority .

IMO the majority of people made enough money to pay the mortgage, socialise maybe 1 night at the weekend , a car and a 2 week Holiday once a year.

Thats not excess in my book , thats normal .

I seen this same class of people getting slated on other forums for taking out mortgages yet people forget that the Govt. of the time done everything to promote the purchase of houses (tax breaks, no Stamp etc etc).


The same majority (as mentioned above) never really seen any massive improvement in cash during the Celtic Tiger but took solace from the fact that they had full time employment , yet these same people will see most of the pain from the austerity cuts .

These cuts to the majority will put people below normality and into poverty .

big b

Quite how, or why, anyone can extrapolate from DF's post that he thinks tax increases & high unemployment are desirable is beyond me.

To me, he's stating, quite rightly, that our expectations should become much more in line with reality, and much less based on tabloid lists of how rich/smart/popular we are.

A more "normal" life awaits, where we spend what we earn & not what we can borrow.

A Mondeo, a holiday in Spain or France, a home worth an affordable multiple of our income - these are realistic aspirations for the working class majority.

The Merc, the Hamptons & the trophy home are best left to those who have earned the income to buy them. That's the way of the world, and we were foolish to think it was somehow going to be different here. Nothing wrong with aspiring to improve your lot in life, but nothing wrong either in waiting until you can actually afford the better things in life before you sign up for them.

(and yes, I do know that not everyone lost the run of themselves. But enough did to put themselves, and the country, in the brown stuff)

Idbatterim

I agree with you OP, mid and high end public and civil servants, long term unemployed and our politicians, have had it too cushy too long. Note how I go from one extreme i.e high end public servants to long term unemployed, as I dont believe the amount of pisstaking is based solely on your wages!

SkepticOne

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

There was another post on another thread where you were responding to Skofflaw on the issue of the bailout and a possible default. In that post (which I think is now deleted or else edited heavily) you say that since Ireland does not have the option of devaluing like Argentina the effects will be more severe since the government will be unable to raise money. However you said that the single currency would allow private enterprise to take over from the public service in providing services like health, education and so on.

Now I don't want to berate these views. In fact I share the view that there needs to be a smaller government though I disagree on the methods. In my view these sorts of changes should come about after open public debate rather than through crisis.

One of the things I have been arguing about being in the single currency is that it brings about a harshness for the people when things go wrong. However it has always been comparatively few people who have held this view. Most of those arguing for a single currency have held the view that it actually adds stability to public finances rather than instability.

Would you be willing to have that post restored so that these things can be debated?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Soldie

Good post. I can't say I'm surprised to see the reactionary Irish media engaging in histrionics. What does surprise me, however, is that the international media have bought into the myth that we've been perpetuating (that the four-year plan is indeed "savage" and "vicious"), and that they are now singing off of the same hymn sheet, too.

SIPTU's Jack O'Connor claimed that the plan was a "roadmap to the Stone Age". It's news to me that the Stone Age took place in 2005. Perhaps he's a creationist.

SkepticOne

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I'll take back what I said. Please accept my appologies for accusing you of deleting a post. I was about to respond to a post you made after responding to another one but then could not find yours and assumed you had deleted it.

rumour

mixednuts wrote: »

DonegalFella,

I take your point but this :

We convinced ourselves that people with unimpressive educations and average incomes ......

..is going to the extremes , not that its not true but such people would be in a minority .

I don't think this is extreme in the slightest. Consider in any country the top 10% are always more intelligent, the standard distribution is always pretty similar. This is true of Germany France and the UK except on scale they simply have more numbers.
We need to be bluntly honest we are no different than any other country in terms of intelligence.
Aptitudes on the other hand are different, it could be argued that we do not have the necessary ones for running a country, but that is a matter for the electorate who think it is acceptable to be lead by people with aptitudes for striking, teaching and deceiving.

DiscoStu

Very few outside the far left clown posse would disagree that an adjustment in overall living standards is not just inevitable but a necessity.
The problem arises when its apparent that without meaningful growth in the economy the figures for servicing the debt and balancing the budget simply don't add up. I don't know of any examples of economies growing the required 2+% year on year while in a deflationary spiral and with significant cutbacks in government spending occurring at the same time.

As it stands the current cut rates will not be enough to balance the books within the 4 years of the bailout plan whether you factor in debt servicing or not(if you do it get's monumentally worse). After 2014 we will need to either default, go back for another bailout or cut 2/3 of government spending. Each option is catastrophic made all the worse now that the safety buffer of the national pension fund has been emptied into the banking black hole with no systemic fixes in place and still according to most analysts going to need twice maybe even 3 times that amount.

If what had been tabled was a sustainable and attainable medium to long term solution for the country getting the finances and banks under control I would imagine there wouldn't be the outrage there is now. Its a matter of seeing full well that the current deal is a road to inevitable ruin for the county, not an overinflated sense of self entitlement.

danbohan

Soldie wrote: »

Good post. I can't say I'm surprised to see the reactionary Irish media engaging in histrionics. What does surprise me, however, is that the international media have bought into the myth that we've been perpetuating (that the four-year plan is indeed "savage" and "vicious"), and that they are now singing off of the same hymn sheet, too.

SIPTU's Jack O'Connor claimed that the plan was a "roadmap to the Stone Age". It's news to me that the Stone Age took place in 2005. Perhaps he's a creationist.

with the likes Jack o Connor in charge we certainly would be in the stone age so i suppose he could have some expertise in that !

Bullseye1

If this is normality in the long term then it's an unacceptable normality for me. How can anyone be happy to accept the current economy as normal. There is no point of a 4 year correction if there is no benefit for the future.

zig

DiscoStu wrote: »

Very few outside the far left clown posse would disagree that an adjustment in overall living standards is not just inevitable but a necessity.
The problem arises when its apparent that without meaningful growth in the economy the figures for servicing the debt and balancing the budget simply don't add up. I don't know of any examples of economies growing the required 2+% year on year while in a deflationary spiral and with significant cutbacks in government spending occurring at the same time.

As it stands the current cut rates will not be enough to balance the books within the 4 years of the bailout plan whether you factor in debt servicing or not(if you do it get's monumentally worse). After 2014 we will need to either default, go back for another bailout or cut 2/3 of government spending. Each option is catastrophic made all the worse now that the safety buffer of the national pension fund has been emptied into the banking black hole with no systemic fixes in place and still according to most analysts going to need twice maybe even 3 times that amount.

If what had been tabled was a sustainable and attainable medium to long term solution for the country getting the finances and banks under control I would imagine there wouldn't be the outrage there is now. Its a matter of seeing full well that the current deal is a road to inevitable ruin for the county, not an overinflated sense of self entitlement.

Well said!

SkepticOne

DiscoStu wrote: »

Very few outside the far left clown posse would disagree that an adjustment in overall living standards is not just inevitable but a necessity.

Even the far left agree that there's been the collapse massive financial bubble and that adjustments are necessary. Where they differ is what form those adjustments should be. The left generally take the view that the problem is mainly one of public finances and that while some adjustment needs to be made in the form of cuts in public sector salaries and services, a large amount of the adjustment must come from higher taxes.

The problem arises when its apparent that without meaningful growth in the economy the figures for servicing the debt and balancing the budget simply don't add up. I don't know of any examples of economies growing the required 2+% year on year while in a deflationary spiral and with significant cutbacks in government spending occurring at the same time.

As it stands the current cut rates will not be enough to balance the books within the 4 years of the bailout plan whether you factor in debt servicing or not(if you do it get's monumentally worse). After 2014 we will need to either default, go back for another bailout or cut 2/3 of government spending. Each option is catastrophic made all the worse now that the safety buffer of the national pension fund has been emptied into the banking black hole with no systemic fixes in place and still according to most analysts going to need twice maybe even 3 times that amount.

If what had been tabled was a sustainable and attainable medium to long term solution for the country getting the finances and banks under control I would imagine there wouldn't be the outrage there is now. Its a matter of seeing full well that the current deal is a road to inevitable ruin for the county, not an overinflated sense of self entitlement.

I agree with this. In fact I think there's two types of outrage happening at the moment. The first is the public sector outrage at having to take some cuts. The second is outrage at the government whose policies in the wake of the bubble bursting have had the effect of exacerbating the hardship that is to come. Most people realise that their living standards are going to take a hit but they are angry at the unnecessary element that they will also be burdened with.

kevteljeur

Just like to throw my tuppence worth into the ring and say that I totally agree with donegalfella; I feel very strongly that we're not in recession, we're in adjustment. It's a great post. I'm someone who earns reasonably well from web development, so it's not going to hit me as hard as some others. But if we're all accustomed to, and have planned for, living at a certain level then it's a hard fall to suddenly adjust to a more modest way of life. Had the government not helped to create the bubble, people wouldn't be in this situation. They would not have the property, mortgage and lifestyle of a wealthier person. That's a tough ride.

I think I would classify myself as someone who is opposed to donegalfella's libertarian views (I believe in a strong, well-funded state with higher taxes paying for better services) but he's always been consistent in his views here, and an eloquent defender of them. In fact, I'm much more open the libertarian approach as a result.

For the record, donegalfella, I think you're wrong about Irish people's preferences on taxation; maybe it's because Fianna Fail has weened everyone onto the idea that taxes aren't a necessary evil, they're just evil, but I think your libertarian view is more attractive in this country than the idea of paying high taxes for state services. That doesn't take away from the need to have a strong state with a consistent, firm application of rules, but I think a more 'managed capitalism' approach would go down better in this country.

We just got used to low taxes AND a generously funded state, all at the same time.



k

kevteljeur

Bullseye1 wrote: »

If this is normality in the long term then it's an unacceptable normality for me. How can anyone be happy to accept the current economy as normal. There is no point of a 4 year correction if there is no benefit for the future.

If they said that there's a four year correction, and then this is how it's going to be forever after (within reason), then people are going to be much more upset. So they're lying. The corner has indeed been turned, and this is what life will look like after four years of cuts, more or less - which is to say, living in Ireland in the early 2000s. Not too bad, but not at the dizzy heights of 2007. Didn't seem to be too bad to me when I was there!

Let's face it, it really isn't so bad, other than the staggering rise in unemployment here which is the main issue for stability. The poison here is the banking crisis, and the related upcoming mortgage default crisis. We're not trying to buy loaves of bread with wheelbarrows of devalued currency just yet.


(Hot-linked to http://www.rickackerman.com/ - please forgive me, Rick Ackerman!)

k

SkepticOne

kevteljeur wrote: »

If they said that there's a four year correction, and then this is how it's going to be forever after (within reason), then people are going to be much more upset. So they're lying. The corner has indeed been turned, and this is what life will look like after four years of cuts, more or less - which is to say, living in Ireland in the early 2000s. Not too bad, but not at the dizzy heights of 2007. Didn't seem to be too bad to me when I was there!

Unfortunately that may not be a realistic scenario. The problem is that in order to service our debts we are going to need to have quite high levels of growth and it is not clear how this is going to happen. Throughout the 90's we had multinationals moving to Ireland and taking a bit of the US economy with them. But now most of the ones that were going to move here are either already here or are moving to countries where better incentives are provided. If you feel we are going to return to what we had in the early 2000s then you have to explain where this growth is going to come from.

later12

SkepticOne wrote: »

The problem is that in order to service our debts we are going to need to have quite high levels of growth and it is not clear how this is going to happen. Throughout the 90's we had multinationals moving to Ireland and taking a bit of the US economy with them. But now most of the ones that were going to move here are either already here or are moving to countries where better incentives are provided. If you feel we are going to return to what we had in the early 2000s then you have to explain where this growth is going to come from.

I would just like to tackle this issue as it's been raised in some form or another quite a lot lately. To say that "most of the ones that were going to move here are either already here" is totally ludicrous - of course they are not. Ireland's educational and infrastructural status has boomed - the bust has not destroyed that, and we remain (more than ever) an even more attractive place to locate to. Except now we're more affordable, those skilled graudates are cheaper to buy than what they used to be.

Notwithstanding our corporation tax rate, which speaks for itself, our unit labour costs have been slashed - we are more competitive as a location to do business than we have been in boom times. This situation is only likely to ameliorate.

The country as it pertains to the public sector industry may be screwed, and screwed royally, but the private sector (as usual) is leading the way and picking up the tab. We should expect an increased pace of foreign investment here as our exports continue to impress.

longhalloween

I completely agree with this. We all saw massive excess in the last decade.

People who had modest wages living extravagant lives, new homes, extensions, having 'work' cars and 'weekend' cars, lifestyle loans, Christmas shopping in New York and private education for their children.

I will never begrudge someone for having a life they work hard for and deserve, but for anyone who believed they could live the life of a prince on the wage of a pauper was deluded and are facing a harsh reality now.

francie81

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Spot on!

doolox

For the last 20 or so years there have been two economies and two sets of rules for workers in this country.

There was a large increase in wages for those in restricted, protected jobs in the public sector and some workers in the private sector.

Most temporary workers and a large section of the openly trading section of the economy did not do as well as others in the boom time and had to struggle to survive in the face of increasing prices and increasing standards for housing, clothing, leisure etc.

When the crunch came and multinationals could no longer afford Irish labour a lot of workers lost their jobs in the face of increasing demands for higher wages to cope with increasing costs fuelled by rising wages in the public sector thru' benchmarking and also due to rises in the craft sector and the protected (unionised) sub-sector of the private sector.

Now all these sectors are in the firing line for wage cuts and also for reductions in wages.

What we will see is a convergence of two separate economies, one high wage, high certainty, highly protected and the other low wage, low protected, largely temporary workers into one set of circumstances for all.

This convergence and lowering of wages and conditions will continue until a level is reached where basic things like food, shelter etc are threatened and then people will try and fight back. Trouble is that for most people the skill to do so effectively has been lost and we will probably end up making the mistakes of the past all over again, indulging in riots, violence, sectoral conflict etc.

francie81

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I wanted to highlight on this. I work hard, pay my taxes, little or no bills, a 10 year old car I purchased outright 4 years ago from saving and have done soo for any other valuables/luxurys I have, just a taste of the type of shrewd fella I am without blowing my trumpet I call this normality but because the majority of Irish people in the boom bubble thought they were untouchable spending like no tomorrow seems to have come back to haunt them.

This craic with property tax is a farce, to me thats like people in America being asked to pay for a TV licence could you imagine the reaction for that even. I say if you own the house no one has to right to muscle in on any stake of it wether its temporary or not.

Hayte

Tipp Man wrote: »

You haven't travelled much if you think there is still dire poverty in this country - but then that sums it up. The expectations of the people are too high and anybody without a few holidays and a 42 inch flat screen must be in poverty.

What? I'm talking about the people begging in the streets and sleeping rough. You don't ever see this? I'm amazed.

My mum is from Malaysia. Her parents live in a shanty town.

BlaasForRafa

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Lots of use of the royal "we" in that op, not everyone went mental.

ninty9er

Inquitus wrote: »

The problem is that alot of peoples costs are fixed and as mentioned above, mortgages along with energy costs etc will likely rise. Its all well and good to point out that the past was unsustainable, but people only have a limited ability to cut their cloth according to their new lower means. When you drastically move the goalposts on people, as we have done, you run the risk of putting people in financial trouble. If I found I could no longer afford my mortgage on my 3000 sq ft home, I would not be able to sell it, clear my mortgage and find a new house more in line with my financial situation.

Simply put with the negative equity timebomb alot of people are not able to reduce their costs, this constraint is the main issue here. Peoples main cost in life is something they can do nothing to reduce.

Negative equity timebomb?? I don't recall many people being worried about the €20k negative equity they were driving around in for the last 5/6 years.

Negative equity is a concept that only becomes an issue once people can no longer afford to pay what they owe. Whether they believe paying more for something than its current value is fair or not is a separate issue, much like the ego issue the OP made. Banks are going out of their way to restructure debt for people who have no way of paying at the moment if those people have been sensible and approached their lender to flag that they would at some point soon not be able to meet the current repayment. Anyone else I have no pity for.

It's harsh, but the amount of people who are incapable of independent thinking in this country is just ridiculous.

People are fickle and essentially get what they deserve in terms of research, effort and planning undertaken.

zig

Gotta say , why I like the sentiment of the thread, a sort of 'get real' , everythings going to be ok, we wont be rich , we'll be just normal' , its still quite an insult to the majority of the population who DONT share the mentality of exceptionalism. As a matter of fact, even during the boom the luxuries of the lavish holidays, the brand new cars, the massive houses were mainly only enjoyed by people directly related to the property boom, but even most of those people shook off that school of thought as soon as the crash happened.
My overall point is that the OPs post a: doesn't apply to alot of Irish, B: is outdated by 2/3 years.

The worry is real, the debt and interest is massive, we did not incur it and its extremely unfair to ignore this fact when there is going to be 1000s of people either out of jobs or struggling to keep at bay on minimum wage.
And the fact that you imply we carry on as if we should be better off than the rest of Europe is a bit insulting, we just don't want to have to suffer way way harder than the rest of them because of FF , Anglo and all the European banks that left them so exposed to our banks, and a failing Euro project.

The money wasted during the boom on public service was paid for by the surplus in the exchequer. The boom was fed by the property bubble, whereas your post implies the bond holders gave the PEOPLE a load of money for us to enjoy and now we don't wanna pay them back.

Anyway Im sure ill be slated for a putting a negative spin on this, but i guess it being the day after a joke of a bailout deal im still shocked at the 'ah well we'll carry on' vibe ive been getting in posts around here recently.

Ive had alot of changes in my political views the past few weeks, this whole ordeal is changing me into the far lefty i never wanted to be. I guess I was naive in the past.

EDIT: I also have to add that STILL, to this day , the doom and gloom 'scare mongerers' are being shot down on this forum, if you quote McWilliams or any other 'doomsayers' your written off as the panicker, these guys have proven themselves far more correc than any nonsense thats come out of our politicians.

amacachi

If we had either defaulted or had the IMF in before having to cover the banks I wouldn't have cared because a correction was needed. Having to pay for bonds people bought in private institutions which then failed is my problem.

cleremy jarkson

Spot on with that post donegalfella. I suggest you send it in to the Irish times or Independent, more people need to be made realise those facts.

imitation

I'm thinking along the same lines as zig, I agree with the general sentiment, its sadly too simplistic to think we can all just roll up our sleeves and get on with it.

I think the people you refer to in your original post who feel hard done by if they have to drive there BMW x5 for 4 years are a very small minority.

On the other hand there many who have been screwed, trades have no demand anymore, graduates can't get work (thanks to them being an easy target for cuts) and of course almost any other jobseeker.

In some respects there lucky, at least they can emigrate, if you took out a mortgage on a property thats since dropped by 20-40% your pretty much trapped, hoping that your job will ride out the storm.

Bob_Latchford

zig wrote: »

I also have to add that STILL, to this day , the doom and gloom 'scare mongerers' are being shot down on this forum, if you quote McWilliams or any other 'doomsayers' your written off as the panicker, these guys have proven themselves far more correc than any nonsense thats come out of our politicians.

Heres anothe Phillipe Legrain author of Aftershock

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1408702231?ie=UTF8&tag=philippelegra-21&linkCode=as2&camp=1634&creative=6738&creativeASIN=1408702231

On primetime. "savage austerity, punitive interest rate, not solving the problem, force debt for equity is the way to go"

cornbb

OP, if "normality" for you is a return to our pre-Celtic Tiger circumstances, you're not setting your sights very high. I agree that the "Tiger years" were unsustainable and were characterized by excess from some quarters, but "normality" should not consist of mass unemployment, mass emigration and a debt that we seemingly have no hope of ever paying off without slashing spending on "normal" things like health, education and infrastructure.

I have never incurred any debt above a few hundred euros, I work 50+ hours a week but according to you "normality" for me should be to spend the rest of my working life paying off the debts of a different generation. I don't know any of these 3-holidays per year/new car every year people personally, I'm sure they exist but I'm sure they are in the minority and I don't believe their numbers should be exaggerated just so we can look back at the boom and say that that's how ALL Irish people were then.

Already, foreign friends of mine have told me that a massive deflation in the self-confidence and pride of Irish people is already evident. I believe it is evident in your post, too.

We were once an economic backwater, the country was being bled dry of it's people. We had a shot at sustainable success, with full employment and all the trimmings. We blew it. Yes, personal excess was partially to blame. But people are very justifiably angry at the leadership and the banking system that was throwing fuel on the fire where they should have allowed it to burn slowly. Yes, people need to work hard and study hard and to have realistic expectations in life. But to suggest that what we are now facing should be considered "normality" is lunacy.

George Orwell noted that there is some kind of general belief that being poor is somehow "noble" or "honest", your post seems to imply this too. Orwell rubbished that frame of mind, pointing out that it implies servitude and a lack of power.

Look at the fact that we're gonna be in economic servitude for decades, working to pay for absolutely nothing, and tell me that we aren't being screwed over. Your implication that "we don't deserve any better" is depressing. I never heard anyone imply that we deserve to be well-off just because "we're Irish" by the way - any race/nation deserves to aspire to be better-off, but you seem to be saying that we deserve to be worse off because we're Irish!

starbelgrade

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

While there's a certain amount of truth to what you say, I don't think anyone ever thought they deserved a better standard of life simply because they were Irish. That's a bit of an odd conclusion, to say the least.

Yes - many people lost the run of themselves, borrowed too much money & bought overpriced houses... ya da ya da ya... we all know that - it's been mentioned at least 50 million times in the media every day for the last two years & although it's true, it is only part of the reason why the country is up the swanny at the minute.

And again, it's nothing to do with being Irish.

The problem we are facing is far from unique & the debt we are now being saddled with is not even something we brought upon ourselves.

Yes, people overspent & overstretched themselves. And they will have to pay for it, through mortgages they will have for the next 20 to 30 years & bank loan & credit card repayments. Most people who have these debts are doing just that... by putting their heads down & working harder and by tightening the purse strings.

It is a lesson hard learned, but I do actually believe that we are well educated enough & hardworking enough to get through that & get on with things.

And yet again, that's nothing to do with being Irish.

The fact that we were led up the garden path by those who should have been looking after our best interests - the state & the regulators - is a hard pill to swallow, but there's very few people who are of the belief that they were not also complicit in some way... it was a merry dance that many were glad to be led into.

However, what is impossible to forgive, is that now the dance is over & everyone has sore heads, the only ones who are paying for it are the people. The bankers & politicians have not & will not pay for their part... and to make things even worse, they have straddled us with an even greater debt - that of the foreign investors whose money was squandered, not by us, but by our banks.

That is the only part of this sad tale that is uniquely Irish.

Bob_Latchford

zig wrote: »

the doom and gloom 'scare mongerers' are being shot down on this forum, if you quote McWilliams or any other 'doomsayers' your written off as the panicker, these guys have proven themselves far more correc than any nonsense thats come out of our politicians.

Financial Times Editorial 29 Nov 2010 - Dublin’s suicidal promise to make whole its banks’ senior creditors

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c854bdbe-fbf2-11df-b7e9-00144feab49a.html#axzz16j1TZubM

More doom and gloom ranters and panicers! :rolleyes:

Japer

starbelgrade wrote: »

While there's a certain amount of truth to what you say, I don't think anyone ever thought they deserved a better standard of life simply because they were Irish.

What excuse do those on the gravy train use so, if not that ?

Go to a border area and compare the standard of living and wages in a town each side of the border. The nurse, the teacher, the politician , the unemployed, the old age pensioner, the single mother, the road sweeper, the retired public servant, the county council worker on the southern side of the border ...they are all paid much more on the southern side of the border compared to their counterparts in N. Ireland, paid by the UK exchequer. They do not want their wages or conditions cut to UK levels because they are Irish. Clothes in pennys are as cheap as any in Europe, and the cost of a weekly shop in lidl in Dundalk is not that much more than in lidl in Newry, despite the minimum wage, insurance, etc being higher here. The OP is right, many people in this country think the world owes us a higher standard of living than the standard of living in the most successful countries abroad. Even during the tiger boom years we were receiving billions a year of grants / EC handouts from Germany, the UK and France. Even now the head of the ESB in this little country receives a higher salary than those of the President of the USA, France and the P.M. of Germany combined. The world owes us a living because we are Irish, and the IMF has no right to drop the pay and living standards of the highest paid public servants in Europe. Everyone else can find their own level. If you are self employed, tough, you will not even get the dole.
If you were retired and relying on blue chip Irish bank shares for a bit of income in your old age , tough. Just keep working hard to keep those in steady secure pensionable employment nice and warm and cosy.

starbelgrade

Japer wrote: »

What excuse do those on the gravy train use so, if not that ?

Go to a border area and compare the standard of living and wages in a town each side of the border. The nurse, the teacher, the politician , the unemployed, the old age pensioner, the single mother, the road sweeper, the retired public servant, the county council worker on the southern side of the border ...they are all paid much more on the southern side of the border compared to their counterparts in N. Ireland, paid by the UK exchequer. They do not want their wages or conditions cut to UK levels because they are Irish. Clothes in pennys are as cheap as any in Europe, and the cost of a weekly shop in lidl in Dundalk is not that much more than in lidl in Newry, despite the minimum wage, insurance, etc being higher here. The OP is right, many people in this country think the world owes us a higher standard of living than the standard of living in the most successful countries abroad. Even during the tiger boom years we were receiving billions a year of grants / EC handouts from Germany, the UK and France. Even now the head of the ESB in this little country receives a higher salary than those of the President of the USA, France and the P.M. of Germany combined. The world owes us a living because we are Irish, and the IMF has no right to drop the pay and living standards of the highest paid public servants in Europe. Everyone else can find their own level. If you are self employed, tough, you will not even get the dole.
If you were retired and relying on blue chip Irish bank shares for a bit of income in your old age , tough. Just keep working hard to keep those in steady secure pensionable employment nice and warm and cosy.

I don't disagree with any of that. My point was made in relation to the ordinary PAYE workers & not those is cosy, pensionable state jobs.

I probably should have made that a bit clearer.

Aidan1

I disagree. I don't think this is "austerity" at all. In fact, we should probably start calling it "normality."

Agreed. I don't really share in the stereotype that everyone went mental with holiday homes and fancy cars, it happened, sure, but the really significant issue was the far more pervasive, but less obvious, increase in living standards across the board. This occurred at every level of society, and was driven as much by tax cuts as it was by wage increases or increases in productivity. There now has to be a long, slow, and politically fraught deflation of our economy - "taking the salt out of the soup", which will affect everyone. This involves shrinking the G/GDP ratio, cutting public spending, and focussing our attention on (export led) growth.

The thing is of course, is that because we are a small open economy, and because of a number of other structural and geographical reasons, this has to be our default situation anyways, relative to our European partners. We have to be lighter, more agile, and more flexible than those countries, because we lack a lot of their inherent advantages (large internal markets, well developed technological or industrial complexes, land borders and close proximity with other similar markets).

One of the few reasons for optimism in all of this is that we are one of a very small number of developed countries that actually achieved this already, between 1987 and 1993(ish), and did it with civility and surprisingly little unrest (this was back when social partnership was part of the cure, and not part of the disease). With even a little luck, we can grow the economy using external demand, we've done it before. Now we have far better infrastructure to do so too. The key, obviously, will be keeping debt to a minimum. That means sticking to the €6bn cuts next year, re-negotiating the bailout whenever politically possible (in an EU sense, not an IE sense), and by drawing down as little as possible from the Bailout fund.

Tipp Man

Hayte wrote: »

What? I'm talking about the people begging in the streets and sleeping rough. You don't ever see this? I'm amazed.

My mum is from Malaysia. Her parents live in a shanty town.

Oh give it a break - there were people sleeping rough in the height of the boom - and guess what the majority of them aren't even Irish - a lot of them are being shipped in from central Europe and forced to beg (a different problem in itself but not a poverty problem)

We most definately do not have a poverty problem in this country