Volume of Exports Reaches All-Time High

djpbarry

Some good news amidst the doom and gloom:

THE ECONOMY grew in the third quarter of 2010, according to the Central Statistics Office. The two main measures of economic growth – gross domestic product (GDP) and gross national product (GNP) – both expanded. This is the first time since 2007 that both measures increased simultaneously.
...
The volume of goods and services exports reached an all-time high in the third quarter, growing by 3.6 per cent on the previous quarter. This was the second consecutive record-breaking quarter.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2010/1217/1224285738491.html

Granted, there's plenty of bad news in there too, as many sectors are continuing to contract. But, growth in industry and agriculture, driven by exports, ain't no bad thing.

gurramok

djpbarry wrote: »

Some good news amidst the doom and gloom:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2010/1217/1224285738491.html

Granted, there's plenty of bad news in there too, as many sectors are continuing to contract. But, growth in industry and agriculture, driven by exports, ain't no bad thing.

But is it creating jobs? Remember they said 'jobless recovery' and this ties with employment numbers still down for the year. Most of the export growth before was pharma related.

kuntboy

Yeah how does this benefit us? A small increase in taxes?

mike65

Does it create jobs? Obviously! The export sector doesn't exist on an island, apart.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/1217/breaking11.html

Manach

It is good news overall for the economy in other ways as well. The export sector consists of a high percentage of tech-industrial produce (services/software). The skilled professionals which produce such generate a positive feedback loop which encourages other companies to set-up here, as per Mike65's link.

djpbarry

gurramok wrote: »

But is it creating jobs?

I’m sure jobs are being created in the relevant industrial sectors, yes. Take biotech/pharma for example:
http://jobsearch.monster.ie/Search.aspx?cy=ie&lid=173&xmso=1#indid=8&cy=ie&lid=173&re=0&pg=1&dv=1

gurramok wrote: »

Remember they said 'jobless recovery' and this ties with employment numbers still down for the year. Most of the export growth before was pharma related.

And that’s bad because?

kuntboy wrote: »

Yeah how does this benefit us?

How does export-led economic growth benefit the country? Are you serious?

gurramok

djpbarry wrote: »

I’m sure jobs are being created in the relevant industrial sectors, yes. Take biotech/pharma for example:
http://jobsearch.monster.ie/Search.aspx?cy=ie&lid=173&xmso=1#indid=8&cy=ie&lid=173&re=0&pg=1&dv=1
And that’s bad because?

Pharma accounts for 50% of exports it seems. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0409/breaking44.html

How many jobs can pharma create? Hint: too much emphasis on a not so much huge employment sector will not help reduce unemployment.

later12

gurramok wrote: »

How many jobs can pharma create?

How long is a stick?

Hint: too much emphasis on a not so much huge employment sector will not help reduce unemployment.

That doesn't make sense - the pharmaceutical industry is a huge employer and could potentially be bigger.

Cookie_Monster

it means more sales jobs, more transport jobs, more admin & ordering jobs, more R&D jobs in pharma if products are generating money to re-invest and so on.

Voltex

over the last 2years Iv found myself reading alot of the pages that appear in this forum. A great many are interesting and informative and some are just rubbish.
But the one thing I have come to realise is that it is far easier for the doom sayers and negative commentators to make statements about our economy and country than those who can see the positives and opportunities.
Ireland has made its mistakes...has taken responsibility for them..and is making efforts to pay for those mistakes...literally...but that doesnt mean our intrinsic talents...abilities and skills are any less than they were when we thought we were the dogs b ollix.

We have a great pool of labour talent in this country..a very easy business enviroment...English speaking..low CTR..and easy access to World Markets...so we are going to get back to where we ought to be...and it will be export driven..to begin with...as export industry does well...then those indigious companies supporting MN and exporters do well...this will feed back into the real domestic economy raising consumer confidence as we begin to feel more secure in our jobs.
Its a slow process..but it will yield more sustainable profitable economy in the future.

Im alot more optomistic now than I have been in the last 2 years...and I believe 2011 will be the last of the negative years with a strong growth in the pipeline for 2012.

cazzak79

is alot of the exports not coming from the agriculture industry.. which is great as the farmers etc need it but unfortunately most of them have been there for years already

Taxi Drivers

cazzak79 wrote: »

is alot of the exports not coming from the agriculture industry.. which is great as the farmers etc need it but unfortunately most of them have been there for years already

Errm, No

Food and live animals account for only 7.5% of merchandise exports.

Hayte

Don't forget that we had a terrible, terrible first quarter in exports. So it does balance out and I believe we still need to produce like duracell bunnies in heat to hit the EU average predicted growth rate of something like 0.4%.

johnnyskeleton

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

it means more sales jobs, more transport jobs, more admin & ordering jobs, more R&D jobs in pharma if products are generating money to re-invest and so on.

It would, if we are actually physically exporting these goods. I don't have trade volumes to hand, but my understanding is that the amount of drugs manufactured in Ireland is small compared to the amount that are manufactured abroad but sold through Ireland via transfer pricing.

Thus, they pay little or no tax from the goods created in other countries.

johnnyskeleton

Voltex wrote: »

over the last 2years Iv found myself reading alot of the pages that appear in this forum. A great many are interesting and informative and some are just rubbish.
But the one thing I have come to realise is that it is far easier for the doom sayers and negative commentators to make statements about our economy and country than those who can see the positives and opportunities.
Ireland has made its mistakes...has taken responsibility for them..and is making efforts to pay for those mistakes...literally...but that doesnt mean our intrinsic talents...abilities and skills are any less than they were when we thought we were the dogs b ollix.

We have a great pool of labour talent in this country..a very easy business enviroment...English speaking..low CTR..and easy access to World Markets...so we are going to get back to where we ought to be...and it will be export driven..to begin with...as export industry does well...then those indigious companies supporting MN and exporters do well...this will feed back into the real domestic economy raising consumer confidence as we begin to feel more secure in our jobs.
Its a slow process..but it will yield more sustainable profitable economy in the future.

Im alot more optomistic now than I have been in the last 2 years...and I believe 2011 will be the last of the negative years with a strong growth in the pipeline for 2012.

Why does someone have to be a doom monger or an optimist? Is there not room for people to rationally discuss the various news items with a view to obtaining an accurate picture of the state of the economy?

This is good news no matter how you look at it. At a minimum, increasing GDP and GNP will decreased the deficit:GDP and debt:GDP figures. The question is though how good the news is, and whether it can be trumpeted as the start of the recovery? IMO it is too early to say.

later12

Of course, you never really know that that an upturn is underway until you're six months into it.

The poster does have a point though, people seem to respond more vocally to bad news or try to search out the most negative potential aspects, sometimes quite un-neccessarily.

I don't believe this does any major damage in itself, but it does somewhat skew the perception about where we are economically and may contribute to these self fulfilling prophecies that we appear rather subject to, both in Ireland and throughout the Eurozone.

gurramok

later10 wrote: »

How long is a stick?
That doesn't make sense - the pharmaceutical industry is a huge employer and could potentially be bigger.

How much bigger? Can it generate 300,000+ extra jobs?

What i'm saying is that its a case of relying too much on one industry to get us out of the mess. These foreign MNC's can up sticks at any time they want just like what Dell did.

later12

gurramok wrote: »

its a case of relying too much on one industry to get us out of the mess. These foreign MNC's can up sticks at any time they want just like what Dell did.

Nobody is suggesting that one enormous Dell hire everyone in the economy. Manufacturing is a highly diversified industry - which makes it useful as a crisis hedge.

Manufacturing is our future, exports are our bread and butter and we should so everything in our remit to encourage traded exports and FDI.

I really don't see how any reasonable person can argue with that.

gurramok

later10 wrote: »

Nobody is suggesting that one enormous Dell hire everyone in the economy. Manufacturing is a highly diversified industry - which makes it useful as a crisis hedge.

Manufacturing is our future, exports are our bread and butter and we should so everything in our remit to encourage traded exports and FDI.

I really don't see how any reasonable person can argue with that.

Perhaps you picked it up wrong. We rely on many Dell type MNC's at the moment just like in pharma. We need to diversify so not to be dependent on pharma just like being dependent on construction and banking brought us down catastrophically.

Pharma has been doing well for at least 2 years if not more. It has not made hardly any difference to unemployment and job prospects in that time.

According to here http://www.sligochamber.com/admin/browser/archive_library/factsheet%20the%20pharmaceutical%20sector%20in%20Ireland%202.pdf , pharma employ about 25,000 people in 2008.

To make it worthwhile to put a major dint on the unemployment figures, you'd want it to at least be 8 times the size that it is. Any reasonable person can see this.

later12

What are you on about pharmaceuticals for? It's very significant, in fact it dominates the industrial merchanidse export list but growth in the export economy is not all to do with pharmaceuticals nor was recent growth led by an increase in pharmaceuticals. If anything, growth in pharmaceuticals is slowing based on previous results.

http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1021272.shtml

In the month the most significant changes were increases in Computer, electronic and optical products (+2.9%), Other food products including bread and confectionary (+1.8%) and Basic pharmaceutical products and pharmaceutical preparations (+0.4%) while there were decreases in Dairy Products (-0.6%) and Wood and wood products (-0.5%).

Nobody is suggesting we be dependent on pharmaceuticals, nor are dependent on it now, employment within that industry is still not particularly impressive. Frankly your apparent preoccupation with that sector of the manufacturing industry is, well, pretty odd.
I can only assume you read something somewhere about the pharmaceutical industry and possible mis-interpreted it.

later12

gurramok wrote: »

To make it worthwhile to put a major dint on the unemployment figures, you'd want it to at least be 8 times the size that it is. Any reasonable person can see this.

Nobody expects pharmaceuticals itself to correct unemployment, are you serious here?

gurramok

later10 wrote: »

What are you on about pharmaceuticals for? It's very significant, in fact it dominates the industrial merchanidse export list but growth in the export economy is not all to do with pharmaceuticals nor was recent growth led by an increase in pharmaceuticals. If anything, growth in pharmaceuticals is slowing based on previous results.

http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1021272.shtml

Nobody is suggesting we be dependent on pharmaceuticals, nor are dependent on it now, employment within that industry is still not particularly impressive. Frankly your apparent preoccupation with that sector of the manufacturing industry is, well, pretty odd.
I can only assume you read something somewhere about the pharmaceutical industry and possible mis-interpreted it.

later10 wrote: »

Nobody expects pharmaceuticals itself to correct unemployment, are you serious here?

You seem to be missing the point. What we see is the subject title of 'volume of exports reaches all-time high'. This was based on 2 sectors growing - industry and agriculture. Pharma accounts for 50% of merchandise exports and employs 25,000 people hence it is 100% relevant to the discussion. Agriculture 7.5% of the total. Pharma has seriously distorted that growth which is/maybe occurring in the economy.

Its all good for exports but it ain't creating jobs hence it proves the FF banner of a 'jobless recovery'.

later12

gurramok wrote: »

Pharma accounts for 50% of merchandise exports and employs 25,000 people hence it is 100% relevant to the discussion. Agriculture 7.5% of the total. Pharma has seriously distorted that growth which is/maybe occurring in the economy.

First of all you're wrong, it is 25% of total merchandise exports.

Expand on what you mean by your reference to agriculture.

Its all good for exports but it ain't creating jobs hence it proves the FF banner of a 'jobless recovery'.

This increase in trade is good, in fact it is extremely encouraging in many ways; but it is not enormous and nobody is denying that the recovery will be largely jobless.

Nobody is suggesting that pharmaceuticals will be the answer to all of our problems, again this turn of the discussion is slightly bizarre.

gurramok

later10 wrote: »

First of all you're wrong, it is 25% of total merchandise exports.

Expand on what you mean by your reference to agriculture.

Where did you get 25%?

Agriculture is 7.5% http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69619454&postcount=12

later10 wrote: »

This increase in trade is good, in fact it is extremely encouraging in many ways; but it is not enormous and nobody is denying that the recovery will be largely jobless.

Nobody is suggesting that pharmaceuticals will be the answer to all of our problems, again this turn of the discussion is slightly bizarre.

Whats bizarre about it? This recovery has been exposed as been pharma led rather than an across the board recovery.

later12

gurramok wrote: »

Where did you get 25%?

From page 14 of the Central Bank's Quarterly Bulletin - the report which we are all, presumably, talking about here?
http://www.financialregulator.ie/publications/Documents/CBANK-Q4-REPORT.pdf

So where did you get 50%? From a discussion you read here, I presume?
http://www.irisheconomy.ie/index.php/2010/11/13/latest-eu-gdp-and-industrial-production-statistics/

Agriculture is 7.5% http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69619454&postcount=12

I know, my question is, frankly, what's your point?

Whats bizarre about it? This recovery has been exposed as been pharma led rather than an across the board recovery.

Exposed? Hmm.

Anyway, pharmaceuticals have been significant for a long time now. I see no reason to fear this branch of the industrial sector. something will always dominate merchandise exports and for us it was always going to be multi national based at this stage.
What's your point, caller?

djpbarry

gurramok wrote: »

These foreign MNC's can up sticks at any time they want just like what Dell did.

Which is why we need to focus on high-end manufacturing and encourage indigenous industry so as not to be over-reliant on foreign manufacturers.

gurramok wrote: »

Pharma accounts for 50% of merchandise exports...

25%.

gurramok wrote: »

Its all good for exports but it ain't creating jobs...

How do you know jobs are not being created in the relevant sectors?

gurramok wrote: »

This recovery has been exposed as been pharma led rather than an across the board recovery.

Exposed? Where’s the cover-up? Who said anything about “an across the board recovery”?

gurramok

later10 wrote: »

From page 14 of the Central Bank's Quarterly Bulletin - the report which we are all, presumably, talking about here?
http://www.financialregulator.ie/publications/Documents/CBANK-Q4-REPORT.pdf

So where did you get 50%? From a discussion you read here, I presume?
http://www.irisheconomy.ie/index.php/2010/11/13/latest-eu-gdp-and-industrial-production-statistics/

From the Irishtimes link which stated 50% for chemicals, perhaps they were using a broad definition.

later10 wrote: »

I know, my question is, frankly, what's your point?

What's your point? Its stated as one of two areas where growth occurred, so whats your point?

later10 wrote: »

Exposed? Hmm.

Anyway, pharmaceuticals have been significant for a long time now. I see no reason to fear this branch of the industrial sector. something will always dominate merchandise exports and for us it was always going to be multi national based at this stage.
What's your point, caller?

Jobless recovery caller. All the hullaballoo about growth in exports is not necessarily translating to jobs growth.

gurramok

djpbarry wrote: »

Which is why we need to focus on high-end manufacturing and encourage indigenous industry so as not to be over-reliant on foreign manufacturers.

We know that. It hasn't happened yet.

djpbarry wrote: »

25%.

See above.

djpbarry wrote: »

How do you know jobs are not being created in the relevant sectors?

Must be tiny as it ain't denting unemployment. Do you have figures to say that 25,000 currently employed is bringing down unemployment from 450,000+?

djpbarry wrote: »

Exposed? Where’s the cover-up? Who said anything about “an across the board recovery”?

Its Lenihan's glory as its misleading.

later12

gurramok wrote: »

From the Irishtimes link which stated 50% for chemicals, perhaps they were using a broad definition.

Chemical? But, obviously. Pharmaceuticals and chemicals are different classifications. Chemicals can include things like fertiliser and industrial materials.

What's your point? Its stated as one of two areas where growth occurred, so whats your point?

I'm just curious as to why you just threw it in there as if to draw a comparison. Perhaps we shall never know.

Jobless recovery caller. All the hullaballoo about growth in exports is not necessarily translating to jobs growth.

That is inevitable. if you were expecting a sudden reformation, then frankly you were being unrealistic.

gurramok

later10 wrote: »

That is inevitable. if you were expecting a sudden reformation, then frankly you were being unrealistic.

I was certainly not. The cheerleaders of the news were. Over emphasising is what comes to mind.

later12

gurramok wrote: »

I was certainly not. The cheerleaders of the news were. Over emphasising is what comes to mind.

The news that we are technically out of recession is worth emphasising - in my opinion it has not been particularly so. It has not received particularly warm commentary either domestically or internationally. That's evident even in this thread.

Anyway, why do you say the cheerleaders of the news were expecting a reformation? Who are you talking about? And when?

djpbarry

gurramok wrote: »

Must be tiny as it ain't denting unemployment. Do you have figures to say that 25,000 currently employed is bringing down unemployment from 450,000+?

According to the CSO, the number of people employed full-time in “professional” or “associate professional and technical” roles increased by 9,600 over the last year. I can also tell you from personal experience that there are jobs of a scientific nature available in Ireland at present because I was recently looking for one myself. And the number of unemployed people in Ireland is 300,000, not 450,000.

gurramok wrote: »

Its Lenihan's glory as its misleading.

I don’t know what that means.

gurramok

later10 wrote: »

The news that we are technically out of recession is worth emphasising - in my opinion it has not been particularly so. It has not received particularly warm commentary either domestically or internationally. That's evident even in this thread.

Anyway, why do you say the cheerleaders of the news were expecting a reformation? Who are you talking about? And when?

The govt are the cheerleaders and some misleading posters here. The economy has turned the corner stuff, bad memory have we?

djpbarry wrote: »

According to the CSO, the number of people employed full-time in “professional” or “associate professional and technical” roles increased by 9,600 over the last year. I can also tell you from personal experience that there are jobs of a scientific nature available in Ireland at present because I was recently looking for one myself. And the number of unemployed people in Ireland is 300,000, not 450,000.

“professional” or “associate professional and technical” roles, only 9,600. Nobody is disputing there are scientific jobs available, its the scale of it along with 'booming exports' that is been trumpeted as a 'recovery'.

djpbarry wrote: »

I don’t know what that means.

What part do you not understand?

djpbarry

gurramok wrote: »

“professional” or “associate professional and technical” roles, only 9,600.

Only 9,600?!? You don’t think that’s a significant number of people in a country the size of Ireland? To put that figure in perspective, there were a total of 6,000 science graduates (degrees, masters and PhDs) in Ireland in 2009.

gurramok wrote: »

Nobody is disputing there are scientific jobs available, its the scale of it along with 'booming exports' that is been trumpeted as a 'recovery'.

By who?

gurramok

djpbarry wrote: »

Only 9,600?!? You don’t think that’s a significant number of people in a country the size of Ireland? To put that figure in perspective, there were a total of 6,000 science graduates (degrees, masters and PhDs) in Ireland in 2009.

What was it in the years before?

djpbarry wrote: »

By who?

You seriously have to ask that despite been told already? Lenihan and FF.

later12

gurramok wrote: »

The govt are the cheerleaders and some misleading posters here.

Link?

Just to be clear this was my question

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69626986&postcount=30

Originally Posted by later10
That is inevitable. if you were expecting a sudden reformation, then frankly you were being unrealistic.

Originally Posted by gurramok

I was certainly not. The cheerleaders of the news were.

So who was being unrealistic? and where did they expect a sudden reformation?

Also

along with 'booming exports' that is been trumpeted as a 'recovery'.

This may be the beginning of a recovery. Who trumpeted it, though, as a recovery?

gurramok

later10 wrote: »

Link?

Just to be clear this was my question

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69626986&postcount=30

Also
This may be the beginning of a recovery. Who trumpeted it, though, as a recovery?

Another arguing for the sake of arguing. FF.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-business/article-23907652-irish-economy-back-on-the-path-to-recovery.do

Lenihan said: "The Government has consistently identified export-led growth as the strategy that will return this economy to growth and generate jobs.

I had always thought later10 and djpbarry were up to date on current affairs.

later12

Seriously? Do you understand the difference between calling this a recovery and actually referring to future recovery, which pretty much every commentator refers to at some point.

There is a pretty huge chasm between the two statements. And you aren't filling it very well.

gurramok

later10 wrote: »

Seriously? Do you understand the difference between calling this a recovery and actually referring to future recovery, which pretty much every commentator refers to at some point.

There is a pretty huge chasm between the two statements. And you aren't filling it very well.

I did not call it a recovery. Perhaps you did as you keep contradicting concrete evidence presented to you.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-07/ireland-s-lenihan-sees-signs-of-incipient-economic-recovery.html

Lenihan wrote:

Irish Finance Minister Brian Lenihan said there are signs of an “incipient” economic recovery helped by export growth.

“We did turn the corner this year,” Lenihan said in an interview today with Dublin-based RTE television, after presenting the 2011 budget. “It’s clear that our exports are recovering and that’s the foundation for economic recovery.”

http://www.businessandleadership.com/economy/item/27178-exports-key-to-economic-gro

Lenihan wrote:

Minister for Finance Brian Lenihan opened his Budget speech today reiterating that Ireland’s recovery will be led by exports.

“Our exports increased by nearly 7pc in real terms in the first half of this year. Output in the manufacturing sector was up 12pc in the third quarter, while surveys point to continued strong growth in export orders for both goods and services,” he said.

later12

Face. Palm. Read my post.

He did not call this a recovery. That is the point.

djpbarry

gurramok wrote: »

What was it in the years before?

What was what in years before?

gurramok wrote: »

Lenihan said: "The Government has consistently identified export-led growth as the strategy that will return this economy to growth and generate jobs.

Not an unreasonable statement. How exactly does that translate into “booming exports” being “trumpeted as a recovery”?

gurramok

djpbarry wrote: »

What was what in years before?

What was it then?

djpbarry wrote: »

Not an unreasonable statement. How exactly does that translate into “booming exports” being “trumpeted as a recovery”?

Read the statements. For the umpteenth time he is saying the economy has recovered(and will be) with leadership from exports. He forgets to mention those exports which have grown alot are from the chemical sector which will not generate hundreds of thousands of jobs.

gurramok

later10 wrote: »

He did not call this a recovery. That is the point.

Which part of the following are you struggling to understand or are you just been deliberatively argumentative for the sake of it?

“We did turn the corner this year,”

later12

gurramok wrote: »

Read the statements. For the umpteenth time he is saying the economy has recovered(and will be) with leadership from exports.

Are you taking the piss here? read your own quote. Not "has recovered" - WILL recover.

Lenihan said: "The Government has consistently identified export-led growth as the strategy that will return this economy to growth and generate jobs

how are you not getting this??

Are you debating the huge importance of export led growth? This is like an extraordinarily unfunny joke.

gurramok

later10 wrote: »

Are you taking the piss here? read your own quote. Not "has recovered" - WILL recover.

how are you not getting this??

Are you debating the huge importance of export led growth? This is like an extraordinarily unfunny joke.

I think you are taking the piss here and been extraordinary pedantic.

He had stated that the economy had turned a corner, do you know what that means?

As you do not, it means its starting to grow, that is on a path to full recovery which can take any number of months/years.

I am not debating the huge importance of export led growth. As you cannot read posts, I am debating the trumpeting of said growth to lead to domestic job creation.

swampgas

gurramok wrote: »

Perhaps you picked it up wrong. We rely on many Dell type MNC's at the moment just like in pharma. We need to diversify so not to be dependent on pharma just like being dependent on construction and banking brought us down catastrophically.

Pharma has been doing well for at least 2 years if not more. It has not made hardly any difference to unemployment and job prospects in that time.

I know some people in the Pharma business, and they are not optimistic about the future for Ireland. Big pharma hasn't been doing so well recently.

Example: http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/88/i21/8821notw4.html "Pfizer Reveals Plant Closures"

From what I hear, there is more interest in building new plants in India and China than in Europe.

later12

gurramok wrote: »

I think you are taking the piss here and been extraordinary pedantic.

He had stated that the economy had turned a corner, do you know what that means?

Yes, and it does not mean that we have recovered or that we are home and dry. please stop pretending that this is what he said. He did not say that we have recovered, nor did anybody on this thread. it really is that simple.

gurramok

later10 wrote: »

Yes, and it does not mean that we have recovered or that we are home and dry. please stop pretending that this is what he said. He did not say that we have recovered, nor did anybody on this thread. it really is that simple.

And it is a misleading path to recovery as based on the false promise that it will substantially reduce unemployment, agree?

"Lenihan said: "The Government has consistently identified export-led growth as the strategy that will return this economy to growth and generate jobs."

later12

gurramok wrote: »

And it is a misleading path to recovery as based on the false promise that it will substantially reduce unemployment, agree?

No. Substantially strong exports would substantially improve employment figures. In that he is quite correct. There is more to manufacturing than pharmaceuticals, and even pharmaceuticals has a larger scope for growth.

"Lenihan said: "The Government has consistently identified export-led growth as the strategy that will return this economy to growth and generate jobs."

Most people would agree with him.

gurramok

later10 wrote: »

No. Substantially strong exports would substantially improve employment figures. In that he is quite correct. There is more to manufacturing than pharmaceuticals, and even pharmaceuticals has a larger scope for growth.

How will an industry that employs 25,000 people substantially reduce unemployment figures?

later10 wrote: »

Most people would agree with him.

When referenced to the Irish situation?

Voltex

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Why does someone have to be a doom monger or an optimist? Is there not room for people to rationally discuss the various news items with a view to obtaining an accurate picture of the state of the economy?

This is good news no matter how you look at it. At a minimum, increasing GDP and GNP will decreased the deficit:GDP and debt:GDP figures. The question is though how good the news is, and whether it can be trumpeted as the start of the recovery? IMO it is too early to say.

In my mind it seems that popular economists like david McWilliams, Brian Lucey, Jim Power, Morgan Kelly are the sexy "PoP Stars" of Ireland 2008-2010. These guys have made a pretty good living out of their doom sayerisms...and the great thing about what they preach is that their dogma never has to be proved correct...because we never want to see thier predictions realised.
Of course we want open rational debate...but as I mntion above..its far far easier to moan than to encourage.
Agian i say 2012 will be the year of rapid growth and a strong recovery.
Thats not to say we have along way to go with un-employment. We have a major structural problem there...we just have far far too many people who class themselves as construction workers...and the legacey of that will be felt for many many years.