Celtic Tiger Time Machine

pepe silvia

If you could go back to the early 2000's, would there be anyway to warn of the recession that would have made people listen and accept, that tighter regulation and sustainable growth was the way to go, instead of the boom that happened?

David mcwilliams and others supposedly weren't just guessing and knew the downturn was gonna happen, but they didn't seem to make any positive change.

As far as i can tell there was no way of stopping the property boom, but the government could have spent surpluses on investment in infrastructure and then we'd be in a better position obviously. But for that to happen the public would'nt have got the short term gains of lower taxes and higher pay and government would have been unpopular, this wasn't going to realistically happen. If you could go back as taoiseach you'd just be voted out.

So imo there is no way anyone could now go back in time and stop the recession. What do ye think?

Cavehill Red

Plenty of people tried to speak out, me among them. The country was being bribed by the crooks in Fianna Fail and didn't want to listen.

murphaph

pepe silvia wrote: »

As far as i can tell there was no way of stopping the property boom, but the government could have spent surpluses on investment in infrastructure and then we'd be in a better position obviously. But for that to happen the public would'nt have got the short term gains of lower taxes and higher pay and government would have been unpopular, this wasn't going to realistically happen. If you could go back as taoiseach you'd just be voted out.

If this is true, then the country deserves everything it got. We'll never know, because FF didn't try to explain it to the electorate that not reducing the 48% top rate would have been good as we could have built up our infrastructure etc. People wouldn't have missed what they never had, but they'd have welcomed the infrastructure all the same, so not so sure that the government of the day would have been dumped out for failing to deliver tax cuts tbh.

pepe silvia

murphaph wrote: »

If this is true, then the country deserves everything it got. We'll never know, because FF didn't try to explain it to the electorate that not reducing the 48% top rate would have been good as we could have built up our infrastructure etc. People wouldn't have missed what they never had, but they'd have welcomed the infrastructure all the same, so not so sure that the government of the day would have been dumped out for failing to deliver tax cuts tbh.

You would have to assume that the opposition would have then made tax cuts as part of their election promises, which would naturally have got support from the public, cause everybody likes paying less tax. Then they'd get voted in.

So Cavehill, you spoke out but you didn't do enough to change anything. If you could go go back now would you do more?

OMD

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Plenty of people tried to speak out, me among them. The country was being bribed by the crooks in Fianna Fail and didn't want to listen.

What did you say 12 years ago and to whom did you say it? What did you do over the next 6 years to prosper from your knowledge and then more recently to protect yourself from the oncoming recession over the next 3

bbsrs

Most normal people aren't equipped with the knowledge with regard to what controls property prices , regulates inflation and balances a countrys budget while providing the services that a country requires to function . That's why we have government because they are supposed to know (or at least their high paid advisors should know) and work in the best interest of the country. People need leadership and guidance unfortunately the culture of greed and a quick easy buck sucked alot of those with some spare cash in and all went well until the bubble burst . Non functioning regulator (we all know the banks lent very irresponsibly) and a government elite mixing with the business elite led to policy geared more towards increasing revenue than running the country effectively ,efficiently and sustainably.

If the government had taken the time to explain to people why we couldn't cut taxes and fuel the property boom taking Japan or similar to show what could happen. We wouldn't have had to increase taxes just maintain at the level we were at. Instead time after time the Government kept spouting soft landing , we're different to what went before .

To answer the OP's question , no you couldn't stop the recession in ireland but it would have been a hell of lot less severe if the government had properly regulated the banks ,didn't incentivise building and explained to people why they couldn't have giveaway budgets timed nicely to coincide with elections.

Will this country run into the same issues again at sometime in the future , probably.

pepe silvia

bbsrs wrote: »

Most normal people aren't equipped with the knowledge with regard to what controls property prices , regulates inflation and balances a countrys budget while providing the services that a country requires to function . That's why we have government because they are supposed to know (or at least their high paid advisors should know) and work in the best interest of the country. People need leadership and guidance unfortunately the culture of greed and a quick easy buck sucked alot of those with some spare cash in and all went well until the bubble burst . Non functioning regulator (we all know the banks lent very irresponsibly) and a government elite mixing with the business elite led to policy geared more towards increasing revenue than running the country effectively ,efficiently and sustainably.

If the government had taken the time to explain to people why we couldn't cut taxes and fuel the property boom taking Japan or similar to show what could happen. We wouldn't have had to increase taxes just maintain at the level we were at. Instead time after time the Government kept spouting soft landing , we're different to what went before .

To answer the OP's question , no you couldn't stop the recession in ireland but it would have been a hell of lot less severe if the government had properly regulated the banks ,didn't incentivise building and explained to people why they couldn't have giveaway budgets timed nicely to coincide with elections.

Will this country run into the same issues again at sometime in the future , probably.

But do you really think a government who attempted those safe policies would have lasted past one term? They would be under serious pressure from opposition offering tax cuts and wage rises.

If they did successfully implement those tactics and there was still a recession they would surely have been voted out fairly lively aswell, they'd be seen as the people who let the good times pass them by only for a recession to occur anyway, so it would have taken some martyr to do it.

I don't think it was the peoples fault, just a fallacy in the political system.

bbsrs

pepe silvia wrote: »

But do you really think a government who attempted those safe policies would have lasted past one term? They would be under serious pressure from opposition offering tax cuts and wage rises.

If they did successfully implement those tactics and there was still a recession they would surely have been voted out fairly lively aswell, they'd be seen as the people who let the good times pass them by only for a recession to occur anyway, so it would have taken some martyr to do it.

I don't think it was the peoples fault, just a fallacy in the political system.

FF were in power for 20 years continuously with roughly 40% of the vote for all those years , if after the first 15 years in power they had used the budgets from 2002 to 2006 to maintain the standard of living people had and keep the economy running smoothly rather than boosting revenue through the constuction / property sector then I think they would have remained in government irrespective of the policies the opposition put forward . Greed took over.

ardmacha

Quite a bit of infrastructure was built and while more could have been built it would have been expensive and poor value. What was needed was putting money aside for a rainy day and for that to happen there needed to be a measure that the weather today was not typical.

pepe silvia

bbsrs wrote: »

FF were in power for 20 years continuously with roughly 40% of the vote for all those years , if after the first 15 years in power they had used the budgets from 2002 to 2006 to maintain the standard of living people had and keep the economy running smoothly rather than boosting revenue through the constuction / property sector then I think they would have remained in government irrespective of the policies the opposition put forward . Greed took over.

Where did they get greedy, surely their main aim was to stay in government, which they didn't manage.

bbsrs

pepe silvia wrote: »

Where did they get greedy, surely their main aim was to stay in government, which they didn't manage.

In my opinion they put their own interests and the interests of the banks and property sector above the interests of the Irish people. Their aim was to stay in government but they only took the advice they wanted to hear which was a massive mistake on their part but then again their nests were well feathered before they were voted out.

murphaph

pepe silvia wrote: »

But do you really think a government who attempted those safe policies would have lasted past one term? They would be under serious pressure from opposition offering tax cuts and wage rises.

We simply cannot know but it would have been nice to have one side offering one theory and the other side another. At least then we would have had a choice.

Cavehill Red

OMD wrote: »

What did you say 12 years ago and to whom did you say it? What did you do over the next 6 years to prosper from your knowledge and then more recently to protect yourself from the oncoming recession over the next 3

I'd rather not identify myself here. Speaking generically therefore, I did what I could do to make the general public as aware as possible that the property market was an unsustainable Ponzi scheme from 2001 or so onwards. I didn't prosper from my knowledge, except insofar that I didn't get caught out by the economic collapse and hence don't have negative equity. I also salted away savings in the form of gold and silver which came in handy when I too was affected by the wider downturn in the global economy.

Icepick

The gvt. could have prevented it - property tax, no tax breaks, not spending big money on expensive property, tight planning laws, bank regulation etc. But they represented their voters so it had to go awry.

Dannyboy83

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/reprimand-for-german-envoy-over-his-coarse-irish-speech-1081773.html
THE German Embassy in Ireland has moved to defuse a diplomatic row after the German Ambassador described Ireland as 'coarse' and criticised our public service system.

Christian Pauls was given a firm diplomatic reprimand over the remarks which "talked down" Ireland to an 80-strong group of potential investors. He was given the verbal rap on the knuckles by the Department of Foreign Affairs' Secretary General, Dermot Gallagher, on the explicit instructions of Minister Dermot Ahern.

He was told bluntly last Thursday morning that his remarks at a function in Clontarf Castle in Dublin to visiting German industrialists were "inaccurate, misinformed and inappropriate at a public forum".

..

In his 15-minute speech the ambassador said:

- Ireland was a "coarse place".
- Junior ministers here earned more than the German Chancellor.
- Some 20pc of the population were public servants.
- Our "chaotic" hospital waiting lists would not be tolerated anywhere else.
- Wage demands were too high.
- Our immigration policy was wrong and we had learned nothing from Germany or the Nordic countries.

He also cited the doctors' rejection of €200,000 a year posts on the basis that this sum was "Mickey Mouse" money and referred to the former dominant position of the Catholic Church within the country.

His listeners, mainly members of the German Federation of Buying and Marketing groups, representing medium-sized businesses, loved his delivery.

One Irish man in the audience was Gay Mitchell MEP who said that if he had made the comments in the Dail he would have been accused of party political partisanship of a totally imbalanced nature.

murphaph

I distinctly remember Mr. Pauls comments and also the crass response of our FF government at the time. Mr: Pauls has been proven 100% correct of coarse [sic].

coolshannagh28

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/reprimand-for-german-envoy-over-his-coarse-irish-speech-1081773.html
THE German Embassy in Ireland has moved to defuse a diplomatic row after the German Ambassador described Ireland as 'coarse' and criticised our public service system.

Christian Pauls was given a firm diplomatic reprimand over the remarks which "talked down" Ireland to an 80-strong group of potential investors. He was given the verbal rap on the knuckles by the Department of Foreign Affairs' Secretary General, Dermot Gallagher, on the explicit instructions of Minister Dermot Ahern.

He was told bluntly last Thursday morning that his remarks at a function in Clontarf Castle in Dublin to visiting German industrialists were "inaccurate, misinformed and inappropriate at a public forum".

..

In his 15-minute speech the ambassador said:

- Ireland was a "coarse place".
- Junior ministers here earned more than the German Chancellor.
- Some 20pc of the population were public servants.
- Our "chaotic" hospital waiting lists would not be tolerated anywhere else.
- Wage demands were too high.
- Our immigration policy was wrong and we had learned nothing from Germany or the Nordic countries.

He also cited the doctors' rejection of €200,000 a year posts on the basis that this sum was "Mickey Mouse" money and referred to the former dominant position of the Catholic Church within the country.

His listeners, mainly members of the German Federation of Buying and Marketing groups, representing medium-sized businesses, loved his delivery.

One Irish man in the audience was Gay Mitchell MEP who said that if he had made the comments in the Dail he would have been accused of party political partisanship of a totally imbalanced nature.

Has anything actually changed ?

Silentcorner

I dissagree with Enda Kenny and the late Brian Lenihan, it was not the fault of the people, frankly I found the two statements they made to be deeply insulting

It was the responsibility of the people who were paid ( extremely handsome wages/pensions) to be responsible for government policy

It was our poor political system that was the underlying problem, I truly believe the STV system promotes parish pump politics, which in turn only attracts the kind of person who can perform in this system, at party level policy is fed from the bottom up...the fact that FF came too close to vested interest groups is also a huge factor but that could have happened in any political system

The infuriating thing for me is, the same people are earning extremely handsome wages/pensions and are making the kind of mistakes that have damaged us even further

avalon68

coolshannagh28 wrote: »

Has anything actually changed ?

I think that sums it up quite nicely myself! :pac: Everything he said is 100% spot on......its about time the country started listening to outside criticisms coming from people without a personal stake in the system. I would love to know what he replied when being admonished for speaking the truth....

The_Honeybadger

A responsible government would have insisted on tighter planning regulations, tighter banking regulation and wage restraint rather than buy em off benchmarking agreements. However a responsible government would have been booted out after a single term, if they even lasted that. Bertie and his pals gave us (the general Irish public) what we wanted, it made him incredibly popular everywhere he went and the country was being touted as an economic miracle in the international media, why on earth would they have done anything differently. Their main critics were FG, who were bemoaning the fact that they weren't spending enough!

I don't think there is anything any one person could have done to prevent what happened, everybody who wanted to work had a job, businesses were booming and the feel good factor in the country was overpowering. No one voice could have turned public opinion enough to make a difference. There were plenty besides McWilliams who offered sound advice, problem was nobody wanted to listen.

Farmer Pudsey

The present recessio has very little to do with planning or the way people voted. It has more to do with regulation and the vaailability of credit.

Up to 2003 this country was fairly ok. However with the forced departure of McCreevy to Europe by Bertie Ahern because of his wish to slow down the economy. He did start the fire but seems to want to quench it or at least smother it slowly, however it was the stoking of the fire by Ahern and Brien Cown that actually did the lasting damage.

It was from 2004 on that the unlimited credit supply that stoked the fire thta caused house prices to rise 10%+ a year and the advent of 100% and 110% mortgage's which allowed Anglo to lend more and more to developers and gave the government a unlimited supply of tax money to spend on Public service wage increses, welfare and new staff. For every problem a quango and cash was thrown at it.

It had little to do with the STV we have had for 80 years without too much issue as has Isreal and India (I think).

Because germany was in recession and its population was savinfg too much money the banks had an unlimitd access to credit up until 2004 only anglo and Irish Nationwide were really using it from then on the other banks and building society's afraid that they would lose market share/there position a size were allowed to lend unrestrained.

If the either of ECB/irish regulator/Government/Bank managment had forced the reversal of this policy then we would not have crashed and burned.
It is abit disagenous saying that ordinary Joe Soap was at fault for trying to put a roof over his head, you can blame him for excessive borrowing for the merc/Audi and the Christmass shopping in NY but I be slow to throw all the blame on him

Personelly I saw a crash cominh however I diod not think it would be as severe as it is and I take no personel satisifaction in being right.

Silentcorner

It had little to do with the STV we have had for 80 years without too much issue as has Isreal and India (I think).



The only countries that use this system to elect politicians to parliment is ourselves and Malta, other countries use it but for local/regional assemblies

I believe it to be flawed, politicians are not just canvassing for Votes they also are very mindful of transfers, it is in this system that a party like FF could only dominate the way they have since the foundation of the state

We have politicians working 60-80 hours a week, but spend two thirds of that time going to funerals/getting lamp posts fixed/medical cards etc etc, you know the things a funtioning state can provide for its people

For 80 years we have been an economic basket case, riddled with corruption at the highest level of Government, we allowed the Church way too much power/input which was then widely abuse

Generations of Irish people have had to leave these shores in search of a future

We have created an unsustainable welfare state, that allows generational unemployment, which spawns a whole heap of other issues ( criminality/addiction etc )

Why, because Irish politics does not promote debate of real issues

It is extremly difficult for a new party to emerge in this system, you may poll 4,000 No 1 votes in a constituency but end up losing to someone who polled 1,000 No 1 votes, this is not a fair system

Sleepy

Honestly, the only way any one person could have done it was to manage to evade the Gardaí for a long enough series of assassinations to force the public eye onto the problems that were so blatantly obvious and move power into the hands of the more responsible members of the various parties.

Farmer Pudsey

Silentcorner wrote: »

It had little to do with the STV we have had for 80 years without too much issue as has Isreal and India (I think).



The only countries that use this system to elect politicians to parliment is ourselves and Malta, other countries use it but for local/regional assemblies

I believe it to be flawed, politicians are not just canvassing for Votes they also are very mindful of transfers, it is in this system that a party like FF could only dominate the way they have since the foundation of the state

We have politicians working 60-80 hours a week, but spend two thirds of that time going to funerals/getting lamp posts fixed/medical cards etc etc, you know the things a funtioning state can provide for its people

For 80 years we have been an economic basket case, riddled with corruption at the highest level of Government, we allowed the Church way too much power/input which was then widely abuse

Generations of Irish people have had to leave these shores in search of a future

We have created an unsustainable welfare state, that allows generational unemployment, which spawns a whole heap of other issues ( criminality/addiction etc )

Why, because Irish politics does not promote debate of real issues

It is extremly difficult for a new party to emerge in this system, you may poll 4,000 No 1 votes in a constituency but end up losing to someone who polled 1,000 No 1 votes, this is not a fair system

If you think it is hard for to get elected by STV then why do you think that there are only two big political parties in The UK and the USA and very few independants. The benifits of the Irish STV system is that you do not get swings to the extreme right or left loke in other countries.

A government has to attain over 45% of public support to have any chance of getting elected. In first past the post systems established political parties are impossible to change. If a third party enters the system then one of the two major parties need only 40% or less to get elected. I think in one instance that Margaret Tatcher won an overall majority with 38% of the popular vote. In her case she targated keeping happy a wealty section of society with anti EU sentiment. Her power base was arounf the SE of England and shen closed down industrial England.

Silentcorner

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

If you think it is hard for to get elected by STV then why do you think that there are only two big political parties in The UK and the USA and very few independants. The benifits of the Irish STV system is that you do not get swings to the extreme right or left loke in other countries.

A government has to attain over 45% of public support to have any chance of getting elected. In first past the post systems established political parties are impossible to change. If a third party enters the system then one of the two major parties need only 40% or less to get elected. I think in one instance that Margaret Tatcher won an overall majority with 38% of the popular vote. In her case she targated keeping happy a wealty section of society with anti EU sentiment. Her power base was arounf the SE of England and shen closed down industrial England.

No instead we get a system where a centrist/populist party gets to rein 90% of the time, and when they don't we get a centrist/populist coalition, and look where that got us

The Unions were given too much power by the last government, and that power has been untouched by the new governent ( just one example)

There are flaws in all systems but you gotta consider the fact that only one other nation on the planet ( pop 500,000) uses the same system we do, it is redundant

Every new party that has tried to penetrate the system and make it to government has dissappeared, the Greens, love them or hate them they were the most principled political party ( and I am no fan by the way ) and they no longer exist as far as our parliment is concerned, how does this happen

Any new political party will have to play the parish pump game if they wish to support their dail seats, which is a waste of time and taxpayers money

Cavehill Red

If we're going to use a system that only one other small place does, why not pick a system used by the most successful other place?
Direct democracy for Ireland now, please. We've given the politicians, and their children, and their children's children the chance to run the country as a representative democracy and frankly, they ran it for themselves and to the detriment of everyone else.
It's time we have government of the people, by the people, for the people. Let's adopt the Swiss system of direct democracy.

Belfast

No one wanted to know in the 2000s.

FF , FG and labour only debate at the time was on how fast government spending should rise.
Fine Gael and labour did not listen to the warnings of Mr Mcwilliams and others either.


Keynesian economics say in these year we should have had a balanced budget and only start deficit spending when the down turn came.

We should have paid off the nation debt.

Belfast

Silentcorner wrote: »

I dissagree with Enda Kenny and the late Brian Lenihan, it was not the fault of the people, frankly I found the two statements they made to be deeply insulting

It was the responsibility of the people who were paid ( extremely handsome wages/pensions) to be responsible for government policy

It was our poor political system that was the underlying problem, I truly believe the STV system promotes parish pump politics, which in turn only attracts the kind of person who can perform in this system, at party level policy is fed from the bottom up...the fact that FF came too close to vested interest groups is also a huge factor but that could have happened in any political system

The infuriating thing for me is, the same people are earning extremely handsome wages/pensions and are making the kind of mistakes that have damaged us even further

Of course in was the voters are who to blame. The voted in the politicians who who caused the problem.
David McWilliams and others warned about the problem and the voters ignore this warning.

There were and are many book on economics that describe boom and busts just like the one we had. also lot of information for free on the internet.
People did not know because they did not want to know or could not be bothered to find out.
I do not remember people protesting about FF bankrupting the country.
People only start to protest when they thought the cuts would affect them.

if people cannot be bothered to inform them selves then well will keep getting the likes of FF, FG and labour in power.

OMD

Belfast wrote: »

Of course in was the voters are who to blame. The voted in the politicians who who caused the problem.
David McWilliams and others warned about the problem and the voters ignore this warning.

There were and are many book on economics that describe boom and busts just like the one we had. also lot of information for free on the internet.
People did not know because they did not want to know or could not be bothered to find out.
I do not remember people protesting about FF bankrupting the country.
People only start to protest when they thought the cuts would affect them.

if people cannot be bothered to inform them selves then well will keep getting the likes of FF, FG and labour in power.

I always find it strange when people name David McWilliams as some kind of sage when he is massively to blame for the situation we are in.

More important question. Who did you vote for? Not FF, FG or labour obviously. Presumably not PDs or Greens either as they were the ones actually in power.
SF, socialists or independent? Not exactly economic sense there.
Not voting? Well that's a total cop out.

What is your great alternative that voters had over the last 20 years.

Silentcorner

Belfast wrote: »

Of course in was the voters are who to blame. The voted in the politicians who who caused the problem.
David McWilliams and others warned about the problem and the voters ignore this warning.

There were and are many book on economics that describe boom and busts just like the one we had. also lot of information for free on the internet.
People did not know because they did not want to know or could not be bothered to find out.
I do not remember people protesting about FF bankrupting the country.
People only start to protest when they thought the cuts would affect them.

if people cannot be bothered to inform them selves then well will keep getting the likes of FF, FG and labour in power.

Who else could they vote for, this is my point, the only politicians who succeed in this system are parish pump politicians, the system is devoid of real debate, and apart from your good self and those like you most people are busy living to become experts on macro/micro economics

Of course the general population have no idea how economies work, show me a country on the planet that is any different

There are many many books on democracy and voting systems, information free on the internet, have a look some day

And also bear in mind that Economists are frequently wrong, I remember in the 6 month run in to the bailout virtually all economists agreed how devastating the arrivial of the IMF would be, dole-slashed, public sector wage bill-slashed, public sector numbers-slashed, two years on and not a sign of any of it

David McWilliams began a documentary on TV3 in the ruins of an ancient South American city and claimed we were headed the same way

People protest in different ways, how did FF do in the 2011 election? It is a very difficult thing to mobilise non union members, remember the unemployed are deflated and those with jobs in the private sector are working their fingers to the bone to keep themselves in employment

This wasn't the first property bubble, it was the most severe, and at its most severe in this country, how did we end up with the worst economic collapse in the OECD, according to you it is because we are all thick

Farmer Pudsey

Silentcorner wrote: »

Who else could they vote for, this is my point, the only politicians who succeed in this system are parish pump politicians, the system is devoid of real debate, and apart from your good self and those like you most people are busy living to become experts on macro/micro economics

If you have a problem with politicians and cannot vote for any as a democrat you are bound to seek a nomination to public office.

bbsrs

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Silentcorner wrote: »

Who else could they vote for, this is my point, the only politicians who succeed in this system are parish pump politicians, the system is devoid of real debate, and apart from your good self and those like you most people are busy living to become experts on macro/micro economics

If you have a problem with politicians and cannot vote for any as a democrat you are bound to seek a nomination to public office.

But if you know you don't have the skills to run for election and you don't see any candidate you have faith in that doesn't mean you can't voice an opinion .

Dannyboy83

The people are thick is an argument out on boards since my first time in the politics forum way back.

But look how aware, angry and cynical people are now.
Unprecedented I would say?
So why didn't anything change?


At least when the Greens were in office, there was at least discussion of political reform.
Whatever happened to all the plans of a list system, of a semi-technocratic government, of scrapping the whip, of reforming the upper chamber?

People here are no more or less thick than anywhere else; It's our system which is FUBAR.

RATM

avalon68 wrote: »

I think that sums it up quite nicely myself! :pac: Everything he said is 100% spot on......its about time the country started listening to outside criticisms coming from people without a personal stake in the system. I would love to know what he replied when being admonished for speaking the truth....

Couldn't agree more. Official Ireland has this remarkable ability to snub or shun all outside influence, somehow thinking 'we know best' even though recent history would suggest the complete opposite.

Case in point- Ireland gets free economic consultancy from a Nobel prize winning economist- Paul Krugman. His analysis of our crises has been spot on IMO but our government (and the establishment media) ignore him. Rather than inviting this guy here to discuss how to improve things they ignore him.

Another case in point- through the Irish-American Business Network there are over 100 Irish American CEO's / Directors, all of them vastly successful in Fortune 500 businesses who have offered their time and consultancy for free to help get the show on the road again. The response to this experitise that money just couldn't buy ? Pretend to facilitate it in public and then do feck all about taking up the generous offer in private-

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Expat-group-considers-withdrawing-from-Irish-government-executive-scheme-146787465.html

On one hand Enda Kenny and Richard Bruton are taking about making Ireland a European Silicon Valley, "a centre of innovation", "bridging the digital divide", "cloud computing", "diigtal hub" and any other amount of buzz words their PR merchants can conjure up. Then they get the most amazing offer of free consultancy from Irish-American Silicon Valley C-level executives and entrepreneurs who have been there and bought the t-shirt and what do they do ? Virtually ignore them.

The whole sorry mess with those Irish Americans made me lose total faith in FG as the job creators they claim to be. They talked out of both sides of their mouth by praising the idea in public and then ignoring them in private. Fine Gael want to flog 'Certificates of Irishness' for a couple of quid to Irish Americans but when they offer to come here and give their extremely valuable time up for free to help create jobs and lend their considerable expertise to give suggestions on improving the economy then they are just ignored.

FG's job creation strategy is on the rocks less than 18 months in government and it is difficult to see it getting any better when you look at sorry incidents like the above.

Dannyboy83

Silentcorner wrote: »

Every new party that has tried to penetrate the system and make it to government has dissappeared, the Greens, love them or hate them they were the most principled political party ( and I am no fan by the way ) and they no longer exist as far as our parliment is concerned, how does this happen

Any new political party will have to play the parish pump game if they wish to support their dail seats, which is a waste of time and taxpayers money

Bear in mind that the Father of the Dail is Enda Kenny (change we can believe in:pac:), and Fianna Fail couldn't even afford to field a candidate for the last presidential election!.

Silentcorner

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

If you have a problem with politicians and cannot vote for any as a democrat you are bound to seek a nomination to public office.

And therein lies the problem

For me or anyone else to get elected you are up against

Established local political personalities ( who most likely have helped citizens with any number of issues ie medical cards/footpath repair etc etc)
Established national parties

Who have

Far greater funding than any private citizen, or emerging party
Far greater knowledge of vote management
Far greater marketing/advertising budgets
Long standing media relationships
Paid up party members/standing army

The funding issue is important to consider, each party with dail representation
receives funding directly from us, the taxpayer, the bigger the party the bigger the amount, the bigger the party the greater the party can attract in donations.

Even after all of that you poll 4,000 no 1 votes ( which would be an extraordinary achievement ) you can be defeated by a candidate with half that, that chap in Dublin ( Brady I think ) got elected on 890 no 1 votes

The system is loaded in FF/Fg/Lab's favour, it is exactly how they want it, which is why are not witnessing any debate on Political Reform, which is one reason Varadkar stated that Irish politics needs FF, Fg/Lab need FF, we don't

NakedNNettles

pepe silvia wrote: »

Where did they get greedy, surely their main aim was to stay in government, which they didn't manage.

You must have missed the point where they all pressed the eject button and headed off into the sunset with their massive pensions. :pac:

One word: Greed.

NakedNNettles

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

But look how aware, angry and cynical people are now.
Unprecedented I would say?
So why didn't anything change?
.

It's still a case of fools voting for fools, always has been, always will. People don't change that easily.

But thankfully, it just doesn't matter so much anymore who makes up the goverment, Europe is in charge now so the fools voting for fools don't make such a difference anymore.

It will take time but eventually it will erode the rotten core at the heart of our political system, for that I feel more secure that Ireland will eventually be a better place.

It is sad and embarrassing though that after decades of self rule we are reduced to being dicated to by outside influences on how to rule our country but we as a people only have ourselves to blame.

Belfast

OMD wrote: »

I always find it strange when people name David McWilliams as some kind of sage when he is massively to blame for the situation we are in.

More important question. Who did you vote for? Not FF, FG or labour obviously. Presumably not PDs or Greens either as they were the ones actually in power.
SF, socialists or independent? Not exactly economic sense there.
Not voting? Well that's a total cop out.

What is your great alternative that voters had over the last 20 years.

David McWilliams is not a sage. not even a good economist. He is problem a better story teller than an economist.
I mentioned him as he warned the Irish public about the property bubble as far back as 1998 and appeared in the Late late show in 1999 warning about a property bubble.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRfMO6agqGQ

I mention him mostly because people in Ireland know who he is.

How was Mr McWilliams for all his flaws to blame for the economic problems ???????????

Who did I vote for ?

as you say there was not much of a choice.

early in the Boom I voted FF not because I liked them but because FG and labour were promising to spend even more that FF.
less of the 2 evils.

later in the boom I voted independent.

in the end I voted Sinn Féin, I did not like them either only voted for them as they were opposed to banking bail out.
best of a very bad lot.

would have liked to vote for none of the above.

PDs had gone nuts and Greens were always nuts and never liked Socialists.

no one setup a political party or a protest group with sensible economic policy or a plan end the boom as the seemed to be no interest in it.

no protested like the pensioners do where there was talk about cutting pensions.

Irish voters were not unhappy with the boom they were only unhappy when the boom ended.

Irish voters were warned and ignored the warnings.

Belfast

Silentcorner wrote: »

Who else could they vote for, this is my point, the only politicians who succeed in this system are parish pump politicians, the system is devoid of real debate, and apart from your good self and those like you most people are busy living to become experts on macro/micro economics

Of course the general population have no idea how economies work, show me a country on the planet that is any different

There are many many books on democracy and voting systems, information free on the internet, have a look some day

And also bear in mind that Economists are frequently wrong, I remember in the 6 month run in to the bailout virtually all economists agreed how devastating the arrivial of the IMF would be, dole-slashed, public sector wage bill-slashed, public sector numbers-slashed, two years on and not a sign of any of it

David McWilliams began a documentary on TV3 in the ruins of an ancient South American city and claimed we were headed the same way

People protest in different ways, how did FF do in the 2011 election? It is a very difficult thing to mobilise non union members, remember the unemployed are deflated and those with jobs in the private sector are working their fingers to the bone to keep themselves in employment

This wasn't the first property bubble, it was the most severe, and at its most severe in this country, how did we end up with the worst economic collapse in the OECD, according to you it is because we are all thick

IMF will lead to an economic collapse here it is only a question of when and the public sector will collapse only a question of time.

No we are not all thick. We just could not be bothered to inform our selves.

Yes most other countries did the same.

We trusted politicians and the banks to do the right thing and did not ask the right questions.

Replacing FF with FG, labour has not made any real difference.

edit
If leaders seek only to preserve themselves that is what they become: Preserves, dried preserves.
(Leon Trotsky)

Farmer Pudsey

bbsrs wrote: »

But if you know you don't have the skills to run for election and you don't see any candidate you have faith in that doesn't mean you can't voice an opinion .

In a democracy the duty is on a citizen if they find themselves unable to vote for any politician that stands for election then they are duty bound to seek a nomination to that office . It is bull that you claim that you have not got the skill, if you can be a critic then you can replace. This is the basis of democracy and this principle cannot be sidesteped. You have a duty to vote.

bbsrs

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

bbsrs wrote: »

But if you know you don't have the skills to run for election and you don't see any candidate you have faith in that doesn't mean you can't voice an opinion .

In a democracy the duty is on a citizen if they find themselves unable to vote for any politician that stands for election then they are duty bound to seek a nomination to that office . It is bull that you claim that you have not got the skill, if you can be a critic then you can replace. This is the basis of democracy and this principle cannot be sidesteped. You have a duty to vote.

I can't do it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9PwWq3le9A

Silentcorner

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

In a democracy the duty is on a citizen if they find themselves unable to vote for any politician that stands for election then they are duty bound to seek a nomination to that office . It is bull that you claim that you have not got the skill, if you can be a critic then you can replace. This is the basis of democracy and this principle cannot be sidesteped. You have a duty to vote.

Give me the €20k I'll need and I'll have a hop of it

Toshchiy Imperatritsy Vselennoy

Rewrite banking regulation and enforce it.


Correctly asess bank debt.


Make sure that money is only borrowed against properly collateralized assets and make certain that debt is properly collateralized.


Make certain all repo contracts issued by the ECB to Irish banks are only given to solevent banks that can actually repay them.

NOT rely on credit rating agencies for audits and regulation.

Insist that all not compromise their collatarel because they have securities notlimite tothe country of issue.

Insist upon proper separation of powers between regulatory bodies , credit rating agencies ,banks, corportions/borrowers/evelopers etc and politicians.


Try to regain coontrol of our interest rates.

ABOVE ALL ALLOCATE SUFFICIENT PERCENTAGE OF NATIONAL INCOME TO SERVICING DEBT!

Attempt to regulate the building idustry and developers by only granting loans to those who have proven they can service them when such loans are over a certain amount. Make certain that these conditions are sufficiently stringent.

Fire Patrick Honohan as regulator and get someone in who is not an idiot.


Get rid of Fianna Fáil.

Introduce better credit asessment for personnal debt and mortages.


Introduce rent control.


Introduce better savings schemes to help people save.


Differentiate the types of houses built more , 2 beds 3 beds 4 beds no garden one garden etc ....this could help create a tiered price system for people to get on the ladder.

Introduce competition in the building industry.

Attempt to end the quango between the banks the govt and developers.


Attempt to control inflation.


Ensure revenue due from tax in actually paid at all levels in society and in all industries.

Attempt to stamp out Govt corruption and raise the standard of ethics in politics.


What do you think????

Farmer Pudsey

bbsrs wrote: »

I can't do it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9PwWq3le9A[/QUOTE]

wel in that case give up cribbing about not voting

Silentcorner wrote: »

Give me the €20k I'll need and I'll have a hop of it

You do not need 20K you need I think the deposit which is around 500 euro's and a couple signatures for a nomination stop trying for excuses.

OMD

Belfast wrote: »

David McWilliams is not a sage. not even a good economist. He is problem a better story teller than an economist.
I mentioned him as he warned the Irish public about the property bubble as far back as 1998 and appeared in the Late late show in 1999 warning about a property bubble.

David McWilliams is like the bible, you can quote him to prove anything. He says a lot without saying anything. Even in that clip from 1999 he says the bubble would burst in 18 months. When Gay asks about other economists saying the boom would last 5 years, McWilliams laughs. He was wrong on that one.

How about this from September 2005, shortly before the bubble actually did burst
Specific market and financial concerns aside, the most important factor driving rents over the next year will be the immigrants in the Spar Generation. They are the people that will generate extra demand, and it is the extra demand rather than the expected demand that will determine the direction of rents in the future. Immigration is driven by push and pull factors. The push factors driving young people out of central Europe in particular will continue as their economies fail to generate sufficient opportunities. Where the economies are growing such as Poland and the Baltics, they are not creating sufficient jobs so a significant proportion of the young labour will emigrate. In terms of the pull factors, Dublin was this year ranked in an international survey as the easiest place in Europe to get a job. So with the economy set to grow by 5%, job opportunities will be plentiful. The only clouds are oil prices at over $60 dollars a barrel which may slow things down but not substantially as interest rates will stay low. This is not to say that there is great value in the housing market, clearly there is not; but cheap money and profligate bank lending should preserve the 'good times' for a while longer.

Finally, I am writing this overview from an internet café in Dublin. If you want to see the future for the rental market and particularly the foreign component that will drive it, spend a few hours in an internet café. Here you will see the rental market, with their pre-paid mobiles, hotmail addresses and MSN chat rooms. Next time you are worried about the direction of the market, drop in to a place like this and then go around the corner to Spar. If both are packed and busy, forget most of the hi-faluting economic commentary, feel the energy, drive and rental capacity of the immigrants and make your own calculations."


Yeah, if only I was smart enough to listen to McWilliams, I could have bought a property to rent out in 2005. I feel so stupid now.

Belfast wrote: »

How was Mr McWilliams for all his flaws to blame for the economic problems ???????????

He was the one responsible for the bank guarantee

Belfast wrote: »

Who did I vote for ?

as you say there was not much of a choice.

early in the Boom I voted FF not because I liked them but because FG and labour were promising to spend even more that FF.
less of the 2 evils.

later in the boom I voted independent.

in the end I voted Sinn Féin, I did not like them either only voted for them as they were opposed to banking bail out.
best of a very bad lot.

would have liked to vote for none of the above.

PDs had gone nuts and Greens were always nuts and never liked Socialists.

no one setup a political party or a protest group with sensible economic policy or a plan end the boom as the seemed to be no interest in it.

no protested like the pensioners do where there was talk about cutting pensions.

Irish voters were not unhappy with the boom they were only unhappy when the boom ended.

Irish voters were warned and ignored the warnings.

So you were just as much to blame as anyone else. You should have been clearer that you were as culpable as any other voter

Silentcorner

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

bbsrs wrote: »

I can't do it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9PwWq3le9A[/QUOTE]

wel in that case give up cribbing about not voting



You do not need 20K you need I think the deposit which is around 500 euro's and a couple signatures for a nomination stop trying for excuses.

Any muppet can get a nomination, it'll cost you a lot more than €500 to get elected

Lantus

Silentcorner wrote: »

And therein lies the problem

For me or anyone else to get elected you are up against

Established local political personalities ( who most likely have helped citizens with any number of issues ie medical cards/footpath repair etc etc)
Established national parties

Who have

Far greater funding than any private citizen, or emerging party
Far greater knowledge of vote management
Far greater marketing/advertising budgets
Long standing media relationships
Paid up party members/standing army

The funding issue is important to consider, each party with dail representation
receives funding directly from us, the taxpayer, the bigger the party the bigger the amount, the bigger the party the greater the party can attract in donations.

Even after all of that you poll 4,000 no 1 votes ( which would be an extraordinary achievement ) you can be defeated by a candidate with half that, that chap in Dublin ( Brady I think ) got elected on 890 no 1 votes

The system is loaded in FF/Fg/Lab's favour, it is exactly how they want it, which is why are not witnessing any debate on Political Reform, which is one reason Varadkar stated that Irish politics needs FF, Fg/Lab need FF, we don't

Very true. Its a point that seems to evade far too many people who have all been brought up to believe in the party system without question.

Todays party's are more like large corporations with big budgets and a range of employees engaged in all sorts of tasks with TD's being the salesmen reaching out to sell the 'product'. At election times we get to freely vote on a candidate that was selected, picked and has been trained by the company to speak as they speak and think as they think. They are required to vote in accordance with the party in any dail votes. The party controls everything, the illusion of choice keeps us believing that we can somehow vote our way out of the problem by selecting company B instead of A.

They have a vested interest in keeping everything as it is and NOT changing it in the slighest. Reform of our system of governance, local councils, public sector is key to building a better future for ourselves, our children and everyone that will come after us. You cannot expect the people within the system to engage in this reform. They have no real appreciation of the problem outside the system they are in as they are almost fully indocrinated in the system itself. They also have no technical problem solving skills and as they all receive preferencial advantage financially from the way things are there is no real incentive to change anything.

Political parties have long stifled any real debate or intelligent discussion. The idea of opposition is laughable. Government in waiting would be a better title as it is just a waiting game till they get a turn at playing god.

Cavehill Red

OMD wrote: »

He was the one responsible for the bank guarantee

How strange. I could've sworn that it was Brian Lenihan and the FF/Green government who were responsible for that.

OMD

Cavehill Red wrote: »

OMD wrote: »

He was the one responsible for the bank guarantee

How strange. I could've sworn that it was Brian Lenihan and the FF/Green government who were responsible for that.

David McWilliams wrote a book. In it he claims it was all his doing although now he is trying to distance himself from the bailout. He claimed in the book that he convinced Lenihan to have a bank guarantee, against significant reluctance from Lenihan. Now he still maintains the bank guarantee was the right thing to do but that it shouldn't have been renewed. In other words the stable door should have been securely bolted after the horse had gone.

Cavehill Red

OMD wrote: »

David McWilliams wrote a book. In it he claims it was all his doing although now he is trying to distance himself from the bailout. He claimed in the book that he convinced Lenihan to have a bank guarantee, against significant reluctance from Lenihan. Now he still maintains the bank guarantee was the right thing to do but that it shouldn't have been renewed. In other words the stable door should have been securely bolted after the horse had gone.

Good, so we're agreed he wasn't responsible for the bank guarantee.
To add to this, David Murphy's book Banksters, which is the best account of those events currently available, clarifies that McWilliams never argued for an open-ended guarantee, and that it was also opposed by the civil servants in Finance, which leaves Lenihan, the cabinet responsible for listening to the banks themselves, the only people who, naturally enough, were seeking an open-ended guarantee.