Leaving the EU - A success story

Juicee

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/alexsingleton/100065718/why-is-greenland-so-rich-these-days-it-said-goodbye-to-the-eu/

An interesting piece on Greenland and their success since leaving the EU. Why in the bejayzus is taking control of our own destiny once again so alien to our politicians??? If Greenland can do it so can we

Laminations

Greenland’s politicians realised that the fisheries policy was ruining their fishing industry

I think that despite Scofflaws measured vulcan-like approach to the costs and benefits of the CFP, that this policy is ruining our fishing industry too.

http://www.marine.ie/home/community/education/lessonplans/TheRealMapofIrelandIrelandsMarineResource.htm

seamus

Juicee wrote: »

If Greenland can do it so can we

The article says it all: Fishing is 82% of Greenland's exports, and the fisheries policies of the EEC at the time were not beneficial to Greenland. Therefore membership of the EEC was nonsensical from their perspective. They don't need a free market to sell their fish, because their level of fisheries cannot be produced by any old country.

Fishing is not a major export of ours nor is it ever likely to be. Pharmaceuticals and technology are our major exports, and given that any country in the world is capable of producing these items in the same volume, removing ourselves from the free market would instantly make it more expensive for companies to produce their products here, and so they would look at moving elsewhere.

Before you talk about removing ourselves from the EU, you first need to tell us what part of EU membership is crippling our economy, and how you expect going it alone is likely to improve our economy.

You seem to be advocating it as some kind of fix-all solution, but without any actual reasons why it would be so.

meglome

The EU would have wanted tasty slice of Greenland's fish as they did with us. But the value of those to each country is vastly different. The figures I can find handy are... In 2005 total of Irish fish exports was €354 million. Our exports in 2005 were €86.8 billion. So while Greenland would be giving away a large chunk of their potential exports we certainly are not.

http://www.bim.ie/uploads/text_content/docs/Factfile%20on%20Seafood%20Industry%20-%20Jan%202007.pdf
http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10009143.shtml

seamus

Indeed, if we were to look at fisheries as a potential major export industry, with a view to disconnecting from the EU and relying on it as an income source, we have a problem of infrastructure. Basically, we have a shedload of coastline and a surprisingly large amount of sea area which is "ours", but we don't have the resources to fish it nor enforce it. I doubt that 100,000 former construction workers are willing to move to Westport and work on a trawler in the harsh atlantic conditions for a living.

Without the protection of the EU, we would be wide open for our waters to be fished bare by EU trawlers and our laughably small navy would be completely incapable of protecting our fish stocks.

That's not to say it's not a possibility in future, with proper planing and build-up; but to cut ourselves free from the EU for the promise of a potentially huge fisheries industry in what - 10, 20, 30 years time - would be a number of times more foolish and devastating than any bank bailout.

amacachi

seamus wrote: »

Indeed, if we were to look at fisheries as a potential major export industry, with a view to disconnecting from the EU and relying on it as an income source, we have a problem of infrastructure. Basically, we have a shedload of coastline and a surprisingly large amount of sea area which is "ours", but we don't have the resources to fish it nor enforce it. I doubt that 100,000 former construction workers are willing to move to Westport and work on a trawler in the harsh atlantic conditions for a living.

You might be surprised how many people would be willing to do it.

eoinbn

The story is completely irrelevant. They are talking about an island that is the size 1/2 of europe with the population of an Irish town been able to make an industry out of fishing....

However we should be preparing for our exit from the EU/Euro as it's becoming fairly clear that the EU project is dead. The lack of a credible plan from anyone in the EU is mystifying. They have alienate a number of countries and all they have got in return is a slight delaying in the defaulting of some europe banks on other european banks! The US went in and cleaned up there banks 2 years ago yet two years onwards we are still just running from country to country pouring water on the ashes instead of been pro-active and getting in before the fire and back burning.

baalthor

amacachi wrote: »

You might be surprised how many people would be willing to do it.

Very few were willing to do it between 1921 and 1973.

Greenland is not an independent country, like the Faeroes it's part of the Kingdom of Denmark.
IoM and Channel Islands would have similar status. The latter two are not part of the EU or the UK but are dependencies of the UK.

Note that all of the above mentioned have tiny populations.

maxxie

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritchard/100008812/irelands-debt-servitude/

Another good article !

Scofflaw

Laminations wrote: »

I think that despite Scofflaws measured vulcan-like approach to the costs and benefits of the CFP, that this policy is ruining our fishing industry too.

http://www.marine.ie/home/community/education/lessonplans/TheRealMapofIrelandIrelandsMarineResource.htm

It's true that I prefer the facts to the mad stories, I'm afraid, although the CFP is far from a success story by anybody's lights, including my own. My objection to the policy isn't that it "has destroyed the Irish fishing industry", because that's frankly codswallop, but rather that it encourages over-fishing by removing any real incentive or ability for countries to manage their national waters sustainably.

If we were to cut loose from the EU and "reclaim our seas", then, presuming we fished at the current unsustainable rate, we'd make about €380-450m a year in landed catch value. That would support 10,000-12,500 people on the average industrial wage, assuming they pay all the fuel and boat costs themselves.

amacachi wrote:

You might be surprised how many people would be willing to do it.

I'd be extremely surprised, because even back in the days when unemployment was rife and we could fish as much as we liked, the fishing industry wasn't any bigger than it is now - indeed, it was smaller. Nor would there be any point in them doing it, since the fishing industry can only directly support about ten or twelve thousand people anyway.

cordially,
Scofflaw

View

eoinbn wrote: »

However we should be preparing for our exit from the EU/Euro as it's becoming fairly clear that the EU project is dead.

The death of the EU has been predicted so many times that at this stage it must just be an extremely active zombie.

UsernameInUse

Eh, Hello

...because there is no party currently in this country who is imaginative enough to change or even want to change the political staus quo. Sure, aren't they sitting on their arse all day and getting a heafy sum of taxpayers money! Why on Earth would they want to leave the E.U.....

Only a Libertarian Party would need to leave the European Union because Brussels policies are in direct opposition to what a Libertarians ideologies contain.

If you want to leave Europe, you need to vote for a strong left wing party.

View

Scofflaw wrote: »

If we were to cut loose from the EU and "reclaim our seas", then, presuming we fished at the current unsustainable rate, we'd make about €380-450m a year in landed catch value. That would support 10,000-12,500 people on the average industrial wage, assuming they pay all the fuel and boat costs themselves.

The cost of providing the navy with ships to police the waters would need to be subtracted from the figure. I believe that the EU part-funded the navy's ships in the past and we need to pay for them with fish or something similiar.

fontanalis

seamus wrote: »

Indeed, if we were to look at fisheries as a potential major export industry, with a view to disconnecting from the EU and relying on it as an income source, we have a problem of infrastructure. Basically, we have a shedload of coastline and a surprisingly large amount of sea area which is "ours", but we don't have the resources to fish it nor enforce it. I doubt that 100,000 former construction workers are willing to move to Westport and work on a trawler in the harsh atlantic conditions for a living.

Without the protection of the EU, we would be wide open for our waters to be fished bare by EU trawlers and our laughably small navy would be completely incapable of protecting our fish stocks.

That's not to say it's not a possibility in future, with proper planing and build-up; but to cut ourselves free from the EU for the promise of a potentially huge fisheries industry in what - 10, 20, 30 years time - would be a number of times more foolish and devastating than any bank bailout.

Look what happened to salmon stocks over the years. Letting a fishing fleet of unemployed contruction workers loose with the tyical irsh attitude of not looking ahead and you'll see what kind of fihing industry there will be left. Fishing is also very seasonal.

ChocolateSauce

Greenland depends on cash subsidies from Denmark for 50% of its GDP, that's hardly going it alone and doing it well.

It also has the one of the world's highest suicide rates.

meglome

So to summarise... Greenland is nothing like Ireland. It's not going it alone and it's not that successful. And pretty much all it's got is fish.

I'm convinced, let's leave the EU immediately.

Scofflaw

View wrote: »

The cost of providing the navy with ships to police the waters would need to be subtracted from the figure. I believe that the EU part-funded the navy's ships in the past and we need to pay for them with fish or something similiar.

They paid for the Deirdre, Emer, Aoife and Aisling in full, as far as I know, and part-funded some of the others. Just before we joined the EU, there was a brief period in 1970 where we had no fisheries protection vessels at all and people were leaving the Service in droves.

We're really not a very seafaring nation, it seems. Nor a fish-eating one either.

cordially,
Scofflaw

deise go deo

Scofflaw wrote: »

We're really not a very seafaring nation, it seems. Nor a fish-eating one either.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I heard a very humorous story about a minister visiting a costal town in the mid 70's where there was large unemployment, when talking to one of the local fishermen, the fisherman said to the minister 'look at what we are reduced to eating' and showed him a lobster in a pot.:D

K-9

It should be borne in mind that the super trawlers have devastated the little fishing industry we do have.

While that is extremely sad and harrowing, look at Burtonport, Greencastle and Killybegs in my own county, utterly devastated, job losses in the 1'000's, it isn't something to base leaving the EU on.

Mr.Nice Guy

It strikes me that a hundred years ago those who would have proposed that Ireland leave another Union would have been met with similar arguments as those on here that scoff at such a notion.

We won't leave the EU as it would require ambition and imagination that today's people simply do not possess. I would love to see it happen though, perhaps involving some arrangement with our neighbours the UK, although obviously not like the arrangement we had a hundred years ago.

Mahatma coat

deise go deo wrote: »

I heard a very humorous story about a minister visiting a costal town in the mid 70's where there was large unemployment, when talking to one of the local fishermen, the fisherman said to the minister 'look at what we are reduced to eating' and showed him a lobster in a pot.:D

Funny you mention that, I've always asscosiated Lobster with Extreme Poverty, During the Darker patches of the eighties that was all We had to eat at home either.

Mahatma coat

Anway, why does leaving the EU mean severing all ties with Europe, Surely Ireland and a few other countries could Remain in the EEC without having to submit to the Political Will of Brussels.

ya know, go back to the original concepts of the ECSC, Peaceful TRADE amongst Soverign nations, as opposed to this behemoth of a single PanEuropean Government

meglome

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

It strikes me that a hundred years ago those who would have proposed that Ireland leave another Union would have been met with similar arguments as those on here that scoff at such a notion.

Sure the middle classes weren't up for it in general. And the poor were too busy surviving. Though what a union we were railroaded into joining and one which we joined with open arms, by the democratic will of the people, have to do with each other I don't know.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

We won't leave the EU as it would require ambition and imagination that today's people simply do not possess. I would love to see it happen though, perhaps involving some arrangement with our neighbours the UK, although obviously not like the arrangement we had a hundred years ago.

Okay let's use our imagination. Most of our exports are driven by multinationals. So we pull out of the EU and most of them move, exports take a nosedive. Not only that but we owe our debts in Euro which our new embattled currency is going to be talking a hammering against. So we then owe even more money but no have no exports to pay them. Where do I sign up for this utopia.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Anway, why does leaving the EU mean severing all ties with Europe, Surely Ireland and a few other countries could Remain in the EEC without having to submit to the Political Will of Brussels.

ya know, go back to the original concepts of the ECSC, Peaceful TRADE amongst Soverign nations, as opposed to this behemoth of a single PanEuropean Government

What political will of Brussels are we submitting to exactly?

Mahatma coat

Meglome wrote:

What political will of Brussels are we submitting to exactly?

<cough> Lisbon</Cough>
just as an example
or any of a number of EU Led initiatives like REPS as another example

meglome

Mahatma coat wrote: »

<cough> Lisbon</Cough>
just as an example
or any of a number of EU Led initiatives like REPS as another example

Okay so what exactly is in Lisbon that causes us to have to "submit to the Political Will of Brussels"?

Quote me the text.

Mahatma coat

We Said NO, that didnt Suit Brussels, So we HAD to Revote, Thats not Respectin the Will of the People, thats caving in to the Will of Brussels, Dosent matter what spin you or Scofflaw or the like put on it, I guive not a Flying Fcuk for the CURRENT Content of the Treaty, as has been demonstrated already that can be subject to change at a moments notice, the Fact that IReland was MArched back to the Polling booths TWICE, on Two Seperate Referenda should be enough evidence that the European system is far from Democratic

meglome

Mahatma coat wrote: »

We Said NO, that didnt Suit Brussels, So we HAD to Revote, Thats not Respectin the Will of the People, thats caving in to the Will of Brussels, Dosent matter what spin you or Scofflaw or the like put on it, I guive not a Flying Fcuk for the CURRENT Content of the Treaty, as has been demonstrated already that can be subject to change at a moments notice, the Fact that IReland was MArched back to the Polling booths TWICE, on Two Seperate Referenda should be enough evidence that the European system is far from Democratic

So what you're saying is there's nothing in the Lisbon treaty that does what you thought?
Should be revoke the divorce referendum result or the abortion ones since we were 'forced' to vote more than once on them too? Or is it just the treaty's you don't like?
I am curious though how you think having more democratic votes isn't more democratic. And whatever the outcome it's by default the democratic will of the electorate at that time.

Mahatma coat

I'm saying that I havent even Mentioned any TEXT of the Treaty, The ReRuns should be enough to show that Ireland was Railroaded, the Difference between Lisbon/Nice Reruns and The Divorce/Abortion ReRuns was That the Later were called for BY the People

RandomName2

seamus wrote: »

The article says it all: Fishing is 82% of Greenland's exports, and the fisheries policies of the EEC at the time were not beneficial to Greenland. Therefore membership of the EEC was nonsensical from their perspective. They don't need a free market to sell their fish, because their level of fisheries cannot be produced by any old country.

Fishing is not a major export of ours nor is it ever likely to be. Pharmaceuticals and technology are our major exports, and given that any country in the world is capable of producing these items in the same volume, removing ourselves from the free market would instantly make it more expensive for companies to produce their products here, and so they would look at moving elsewhere.

Before you talk about removing ourselves from the EU, you first need to tell us what part of EU membership is crippling our economy, and how you expect going it alone is likely to improve our economy.

You seem to be advocating it as some kind of fix-all solution, but without any actual reasons why it would be so.

We could also get back our sugar industry (from scratch) which tbh would be small compensation fr leaving the free market.

However, what you said about the expenses for companises already stands' notwithstanding the depression the cost for them to stay in Ireland is too high (hence the exodus of multinationals)

meglome

Mahatma coat wrote: »

I'm saying that I havent even Mentioned any TEXT of the Treaty, The ReRuns should be enough to show that Ireland was Railroaded, the Difference between Lisbon/Nice Reruns and The Divorce/Abortion ReRuns was That the Later were called for BY the People

I hate to break the bad news but the government of the day are the only ones who can call a referendum. Maybe you should vote for someone who would change that.

View

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Dosent matter what spin you or Scofflaw or the like put on it

Nor does it matter what spin you put on it.

The Supreme Court has already addressed this issue. According to it, as the people have a free choice in each and every referendum, all referenda are just as democratic as each other.

Essentially you are sneering at a democratic decision of the people, so spare us this "I am concern for democracy" act.

RandomName2

View wrote: »

Nor does it matter what spin you put on it.

The Supreme Court has already addressed this issue. According to it, as the people have a free choice in each and every referendum, all referenda are just as democratic as each other.

Essentially you are sneering at a democratic decision of the people, so spare us this "I am concern for democracy" act.

Well.. erm... it was hardly as simple as that. The referenda concerning internal laws and international treaties were kind of different. Quote: 'Ratification will continue - regardless' and 'We're safer in Europe'. Not meaning the drag the whole thing up again but there was bitterness... from people who voted both ways. Insofar that one may consider the ramifications selfishly there was little that we gained from it; or democracy in general

meglome

RandomName2 wrote: »

Well.. erm... it was hardly as simple as that. The referenda concerning internal laws and international treaties were kind of different. Quote: 'Ratification will continue - regardless' and 'We're safer in Europe'. Not meaning the drag the whole thing up again but there was bitterness... from people who voted both ways. Insofar that one may consider the ramifications selfishly there was little that we gained from it; or democracy in general

Sorry I'm a bit lost. We voted Yes for it by a large percentage. It made the EU more accountable. I'm not seeing the problem.

What I am seeing is some serious cases of sour grapes and trying to blame it for our home grown problems by people with an agenda. There's plenty of blame to go around in our current situation but the EU or Lisbon had didn't make us do any of it.

JustinDee

Mahatma coat wrote: »

I'm saying that I havent even Mentioned any TEXT of the Treaty

The 'No to Lisbon' campaign also failed to mention much of the text of the treaty in both referenda.

Funny thread this. Comparing Greenland to Ireland and the delusion that leaving the EU if it ever happened would have no consequences.
Class.

Scofflaw

RandomName2 wrote: »

Well.. erm... it was hardly as simple as that. The referenda concerning internal laws and international treaties were kind of different. Quote: 'Ratification will continue - regardless' and 'We're safer in Europe'. Not meaning the drag the whole thing up again but there was bitterness... from people who voted both ways. Insofar that one may consider the ramifications selfishly there was little that we gained from it; or democracy in general

Democracy did gain from it - and in the long run, we gain from that, although we don't generally pay much attention to democracy in this country, because it doesn't always deliver the results we want. That's why we prefer our clientilist oligarchy, and pulling a stroke to putting it to a vote. We believe that the job of our politicians in Europe is to pull strokes there on our behalf, just as we expect our TDs to do in our national 'democratic' parliament.

cordially,
Scofflaw

View

RandomName2 wrote: »

View wrote: »

Nor does it matter what spin you put on it.

The Supreme Court has already addressed this issue. According to it, as the people have a free choice in each and every referendum, all referenda are just as democratic as each other.

Essentially you are sneering at a democratic decision of the people, so spare us this "I am concern for democracy" act.

Well.. erm... it was hardly as simple as that. The referenda concerning internal laws and international treaties were kind of different.

Actually, it as simple as that - unless, you refuse to accept the judgments and constitutional position of the Supreme Court, that is.

The relevant judgment by the Supreme Court was an actual Lisbon one. In the relevant case, the plaintiff challenged the holding of a second referendum on the grounds that was undemocratic and unconstitutional. The Supreme Court unanimously ruled against him.

CokaColumbo

seamus wrote: »

...removing ourselves from the free market would instantly make it more expensive for companies to produce their products here, and so they would look at moving elsewhere.

There is nothing to suggest that we couldn't leave the EU and join the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) along with Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, and Liechtenstein where we would have complete access to European markets.

Personally, I want to withdraw from the EU because we are no longer a sovereign country. A large majority of our laws are initiated by the EU commission, an unelected and unaccountable body, and are ratified by an EU parliament over which we have almost no influence and most of whose members have almost no meaningful understanding of the laws they vote for.
We are not allowed to have an independent immigration policy; our supreme court is, well, not supreme; our Central Bank's inability to set our own interest rates has gone a long way in crippling our economy; our referendums don't mean jack sh*t to the EU commission (nor do those of France or the Netherlands); blanket, one size fits all, regulations harm the competitiveness of small businesses; the EU wants to develop a co-ordinated foreign policy and inculcate this European identity nonsense... the list goes on.

We do not have control over our own country. Simply the idea of having a non-Irish person pass a law over Irish people or having a foreign court overrule our Supreme Court makes me sick.

femur61

Juicee wrote: »

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/alexsingleton/100065718/why-is-greenland-so-rich-these-days-it-said-goodbye-to-the-eu/

An interesting piece on Greenland and their success since leaving the EU. Why in the bejayzus is taking control of our own destiny once again so alien to our politicians??? If Greenland can do it so can we

Jasus, look at the mess we're in because we thought under Bertie we could go it alone. Can you imagine if we didn't have the EU/IMF to bail us out.

JustinDee

CokaColumbo wrote: »

There is nothing to suggest that we couldn't leave the EU and join the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) along with Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, and Liechtenstein where we would have complete access to European markets

Yes there is.
Firstly a currency would be based on what? Argentinian style inflation would be supported by what?

Then there's the actual economies of the four countries you mention.
Norway has one of the largest oil reserves in the world and largest fishing industries. It can afford to be self-sufficient and has value as a trading partner.
The other three the same but with economies based on a strong domestic banking sector. Didn't turn out so well for one of them though, did it?

Ireland has what?
An agricultural sector smaller than that of Denmark.
A failed banking system.
Dependency on outside sources (the EU) for structural funding.
An even higher dependency on foreign corporates basing themselves in the country with this made only affordable by a corporate tax rate that is struggling to compete with cheap labour and incentives overseas.

No comparison and I look forward to the next taxi driver who tries to tell me otherwise again.

CokaColumbo

JustinDee wrote: »

Yes there is.
Firstly a currency would be based on what? Argentinian style inflation would be supported by what?

Then there's the actual economies of the four countries you mention.
Norway has one of the largest oil reserves in the world and largest fishing industries. It can afford to be self-sufficient and has value as a trading partner.
The other three the same but with economies based on a strong domestic banking sector. Didn't turn out so well for one of them though, did it?

Ireland has what?
An agricultural sector smaller than that of Denmark.
A failed banking system.
Dependency on outside sources (the EU) for structural funding.
An even higher dependency on foreign corporates basing themselves in the country with this made only affordable by a corporate tax rate that is struggling to compete with cheap labour and incentives overseas.

No comparison and I look forward to the next taxi driver who tries to tell me otherwise again.

Well, how did we establish a currency the last time (after a war which destroyed our country)? Didn't we tie it to the pound?

And who is talking about self-sufficiency? I am the last person to favour autarky. As long as we erect minimal barriers to international trade; have a low tax rate, personal and corporate; low government spending; and slash the red tape for people who want to set up a business, there is no reason why this country cannot become one of the most prosperous economies in this world. If the record of history is anything to go by, free-markets, which we do not have by a long shot at the moment, are a winning recipe for economic prosperity.

JustinDee

CokaColumbo wrote: »

Well, how did we establish a currency the last time (after a war which destroyed our country)? Didn't we tie it to the pound?

Are you suggesting a link to sterling? Unworkable. What does Britain get out of it? Why would Britain, or anyone for that matter, waste time on an untrustworthy and actually, broken economy?

CokaColumbo wrote: »

And who is talking about self-sufficiency? I am the last person to favour autarky. As long as we erect minimal barriers to international trade; have a low tax rate, personal and corporate; low government spending; and slash the red tape for people who want to set up a business, there is no reason why this country cannot become one of the most prosperous economies in this world. If the record of history is anything to go by, free-markets, which we do not have by a long shot at the moment, are a winning recipe for economic prosperity.

I'm afraid you are. If you are not self-sufficient in such an economy, you are dependent on others. A low-tax economy even in personal income in a singular economy dependent on no-one else?? Where has this worked? Your four fream countries? Nope. Anywhere? Saudi Arabia maybe. UAE.

CokaColumbo

JustinDee wrote: »

Are you suggesting a link to sterling? Unworkable. What does Britain get out of it? Why would Britain, or anyone for that matter, waste time on an untrustworthy and actually, broken economy?

I'm afraid you are. If you are not self-sufficient in such an economy, you are dependent on others. A low-tax economy even in personal income in a singular economy dependent on no-one else?? Where has this worked? Your four fream countries? Nope. Anywhere? Saudi Arabia maybe. UAE.

I admit that in relation to establishing a currency, I have not read extensively about it. However, I am not advocating for our withdrawal from the EU during a deep economic recession. Stability would, I imagine, be necessary for such a move. Again though, I ask you, how did we establish a currency in the 1920s after a destructive war of independence?

Without causing offence, you lack a basic understanding of how an economy is able to grow; natural resources or a huge population is not necessary for economic prosperity. As long as government interference in the economy is kept to a minimum, individual entrepreneurialism and industry will flourish as will foreign direct investment. A country with favourable tax rates and competitive wages (made uncompetitive by government action) will attract investment and become, over time, a prosperous centre of trade and manufacture. Dependent on nobody else? Absolutely not. We should depend on the whole world, as well as ourselves, for investment.

The Celtic Tiger, up until the turn of the millennium and our membership of the EMU, was an example of this. Why has Hong Kong flourished as an economy? Why has India, South Korea and many other countries? What has brought the former Eastern Soviet Bloc into more prosperous times? It has been a reduction of government interference in their economies and the growth of free-market capitalism.

Finally, the four members of the EFTA are not my idols. They have simply retained most of the economic benefits of EU memberships whilst remaining sovereign countries (not entirely sure about Iceland but anyway, the point remains). Our membership of the EU has meant that we have handed our national independence which we fought to get from the British and simply handed a large chunk of it over to Brussels. And it's only going to get worse.

JustinDee

CokaColumbo wrote: »

I admit that in relation to establishing a currency, I have not read extensively about it. However, I am not advocating for our withdrawal from the EU during a deep economic recession. Stability would, I imagine, be necessary for such a move. Again though, I ask you, how did we establish a currency in the 1920s after a destructive war of independence?

Basically and simply put: loans and

CokaColumbo wrote: »

Without causing offence, you lack a basic understanding of how an economy is able to grow

No, I most certainly do not.

CokaColumbo wrote: »

natural resources or a huge population is not necessary for economic prosperity. As long as government interference in the economy is kept to a minimum, individual entrepreneurialism and industry will flourish as will foreign direct investment. A country with favourable tax rates and competitive wages (made uncompetitive by government action) will attract investment and become, over time, a prosperous centre of trade and manufacture. Dependent on nobody else? Absolutely not. We should depend on the whole world, as well as ourselves, for investment

What in the world do you think would instill confidence into a foreign investor to setup in Ireland given the incompetence and disregard for future planning it has shown so far? This question applies to the near future also. Not just during recessive times.

CokaColumbo wrote: »

The Celtic Tiger, up until the turn of the millennium and our membership of the EMU, was an example of this. Why has Hong Kong flourished as an economy?

It was a British colony and is back now as Chinese. I'll give you a guess how it has prospered. "Hong Kong money"?

CokaColumbo wrote: »

Why has India, South Korea and many other countries? What has brought the former Eastern Soviet Bloc into more prosperous times? It has been a reduction of government interference in their economies and the growth of free-market capitalism

No government interference in the Russian economy??? This is simply jaw-dropping stuff. South Korea is in receipt of foreign funding from the States, France and the UK. India? Thanks to its labour rates and class system, it is able to offer itself to the likes of the EU, States as an outsourcing location in manufacturing and export location. I'm sure its all rosy there for its inhabitants.

CokaColumbo wrote: »

Finally, the four members of the EFTA are not my idols. They have simply retained most of the economic benefits of EU memberships whilst remaining sovereign countries (not entirely sure about Iceland but anyway, the point remains)

Three of them do because they have worth. They have something to show. They are not dependent on foreign investment.
When things sag in Ireland, people hold their breath and hope the likes of Intel, the dot coms, Pfizer, HP, Boston Sci etc don't just say bugger this and up sticks. You can't base an economy on this precedent.

CokaColumbo wrote: »

Our membership of the EU has meant that we have handed our national independence which we fought to get from the British and simply handed a large chunk of it over to Brussels. And it's only going to get worse.

Oh ffs.
Without "Brussels", the no-frills handing out of money to Ireland would never have surfaced. No structural funding. No fiscal infrastructure would be propped up. How could Ireland afford its tax structure in the first place?
I don't know how old you are but I actually remember the 70s and 80s in Ireland.

Scofflaw

and slash the red tape for people who want to set up a business

I often wonder how many of the people who make this statement have actually set up a business in Ireland. The basic 'red tape' involved in setting up a business in Ireland is next to nothing - about 3 working days worth of time including the bank accounts, and not particularly complex. Compared to most other countries in the world, that's very close to non-existent. The costs are similarly low - about €400-€500. There's not enough red tape there for 'slashing' it to make any real difference, which is why we're currently (2010) number 5 on the world index of economic freedom. There isn't a long way up to go.

I can only assume, therefore, that people are referring to compliance with things like product and worker health and safety rules - in which case they should explicitly say so.

cordially,
Scofflaw

femur61

CokaColumbo wrote: »

Our membership of the EU has meant that we have handed our national independence which we fought to get from the British and simply handed a large chunk of it over to Brussels. And it's only going to get worse.

Was it the EU that made the banks lie to us, was the EU that gave the developers an attitude that they were invincible, was the EU who gave away hugely inflated wages and pensions to the PS. Yes, we fought to get our independence from the English and what have we allowed to happen. We have perpetuated cronyism and allowed cute hoorism to flourish in our society. Also, what did we initially allow to happen when we got our independence we basically treated the lower classes in our society the same way as the UK did to us. So stop looking at this with rose tinted spectacles.