Second Captains

lawred2 · 28-09-2017 11:46AM

corwill wrote: »

The lads are nailing it this week, very entertaining.

It has been a very good week. Thankfully because last week was atrocious. (Political pod apart)

Running Balance · 28-09-2017 05:44PM

lawred2 wrote:

Frank Murphy is an Irish sporting institution.

Correction self serving sporting institution.

dulux99 · 28-09-2017 06:19PM

lawred2 wrote: »

It has been a very good week. Thankfully because last week was atrocious. (Political pod apart)

I'd agree with this, I was wondering had I just had enough of 5 pods a week towards the end of last week, it was terrible. But this week is quality. If I were to nitpick I would say the random enough 25 minute conversation about the gay vote in Australia was a bit unnecessary, but that's going through it with a fine tooth comb

Cazale · 28-09-2017 09:04PM

Delaney sounded like he was in a Mcdonalds on today's pod.

riemann · 28-09-2017 09:04PM

dulux99 wrote: »

I would say the random enough 25 minute conversation about the gay vote in Australia was a bit unnecessary, but that's going through it with a fine tooth comb

I'm with you there.

Was feeling the same last week, skipped all the gaa and the rest were poor. Thought the politics podcast was especially so, essentially buzzwords mixed with amateur sociology and economics, I didn't quite catch which college yer man was teaching in? Yale? Cornell? Ballyfermot?

CiaranW · 28-09-2017 09:14PM

Yeah the GAA pods do nothing for me. I'm just thankful it's over for another while now!

dulux99 · 28-09-2017 09:18PM

riemann wrote: »

I'm with you there.

Was feeling the same last week, skipped all the gaa and the rest were poor. Thought the politics podcast was especially so, essentially buzzwords mixed with amateur sociology and economics, I didn't quite catch which college yer man was teaching in? Yale? Cornell? Ballyfermot?

Being truthful none of the political podcasts have done much for me yet. But I love when the two worlds meet, such as the trump/nfl coverage this week. Second captains at their best imo

corwill · 28-09-2017 09:19PM

riemann wrote: »

Thought the politics podcast was especially so, essentially buzzwords mixed with amateur sociology and economics, I didn't quite catch which college yer man was teaching in? Yale? Cornell? Ballyfermot?

http://www.aidanregan.com/full_cv.html

Was there anything substantive you took issue with, rather than choice of language, or 'buzzwords' if you will?

Loafing Oaf · 28-09-2017 09:21PM

Cazale wrote: »

Delaney sounded like he was in a Mcdonalds on today's pod.

Anything like this?:P

riemann · 28-09-2017 09:34PM

corwill wrote: »

http://www.aidanregan.com/full_cv.html

Was there anything substantive you took issue with, rather than choice of language, or 'buzzwords' if you will?

The crass generalisations for one i.e. Swedish Programmers. Plus the simple fact the data provided by employers makes no distinction between say a Marketing Executive and Cleaner, if you work for Facebook you're "in the tech industry".

Paper won't refuse ink.

corwill · 28-09-2017 09:39PM

riemann wrote: »

The crass generalisations for one i.e. Swedish Programmers. Plus the simple fact the data provided by employers makes no distinction between say a Marketing Executive and Cleaner, if you work for Facebook you're "in the tech industry".

Paper won't refuse ink.

Is there a large or largish company left in Dublin that doesn't outsource functions like office cleaning, to the likes of Noonans or whoever?

lawred2 · 29-09-2017 07:14AM

riemann wrote: »

corwill wrote: »

http://www.aidanregan.com/full_cv.html

Was there anything substantive you took issue with, rather than choice of language, or 'buzzwords' if you will?

The crass generalisations for one i.e. Swedish Programmers. Plus the simple fact the data provided by employers makes no distinction between say a Marketing Executive and Cleaner, if you work for Facebook you're "in the tech industry".

Paper won't refuse ink.

Well Swedish programmers was most definitely tongue in cheek..

And they did make reference to the fact that majority of staff working for tech companies here are not necessarily technical engineering staff. But those exact figures are hard to obtain.

But the fact does remains that those people are working for tech companies in the tech industry so I'm not sure it's worth getting too upset about.

Pete Moss · 29-09-2017 08:06AM

Must say, I'm enjoying the new Early/Dunphy sound clip with Murder Was The Case playing in the background. Kept cracking up at Murph's "You don't have the balls, the shtones" line.

corwill · 29-09-2017 09:23AM

riemann wrote: »

Yes it might have required some actual research.

Still waiting to hear your actual, substantive issue here, because I'd be interested to hear it.

Here's the abstract for Regan's article, which formed the basis for the post's discussion:

"In this paper we argue that Ireland’s post-crisis economic recovery in Europe was driven by foreign direct investment (FDI) from Silicon Valley, and whilst this growth model was made possible by Ireland’s low corporate tax rates, it was also a result of these firms using Ireland to directly access the European labour market. We evidence this contention via sectoral and geographic analyses while simultaneously showing that Irish fiscal policies have not redistributed gains from the recovery to the broader population. As a result, the economic recovery has been most actively felt by those in the FDI sectors, including foreign-national workers from the EU and beyond. We suggest that this experience indicates that Ireland’s FDI-led model of capitalist development has created clear winners and losers, with significant distributional implications. The FDI growth regime been made possible by inward migration and European integration, but given the unequal distribution of the economic benefits that this generates, it is unlikely to be politically, or electorally, sustainable."

What's your actual beef with the core argument being made?

Raisins · 29-09-2017 10:48AM

Pter wrote: »

Well......no?

Like did you not hear their stats, references to academic works and published authors etc?

If so, please let me know which pub you go to......

corwill wrote: »

Still waiting to hear your actual, substantive issue here, because I'd be interested to hear it.

Here's the abstract for Regan's article, which formed the basis for the post's discussion:

"In this paper we argue that Ireland’s post-crisis economic recovery in Europe was driven by foreign direct investment (FDI) from Silicon Valley, and whilst this growth model was made possible by Ireland’s low corporate tax rates, it was also a result of these firms using Ireland to directly access the European labour market. We evidence this contention via sectoral and geographic analyses while simultaneously showing that Irish fiscal policies have not redistributed gains from the recovery to the broader population. As a result, the economic recovery has been most actively felt by those in the FDI sectors, including foreign-national workers from the EU and beyond. We suggest that this experience indicates that Ireland’s FDI-led model of capitalist development has created clear winners and losers, with significant distributional implications. The FDI growth regime been made possible by inward migration and European integration, but given the unequal distribution of the economic benefits that this generates, it is unlikely to be politically, or electorally, sustainable."

What's your actual beef with the core argument being made?

It's the constant generalisations that I have a problem with. I feels a little simplistic. They kept referring to the "political elite" in the pod? Who are they? He obviously means something more than the current government or event the Dail, I'd love to have asked what that means.

"Irish fiscal policies have not redistributed gains from the recovery to the broader population".

Is that actually true? Who is in the "broader" population? What does he mean by re-distribution? I'm not saying I disagree with it but I have a feeling it's a pretty bald assertion that would need detailed argument. You could have at least a pod on that assertion alone.

The pod was littered with casual assertions by Aidan Regan and by Ken that - while I respect them both - I don't think they're qualified to make.

For example, I remember them stating the EU was undemocratic at one stage. Professors in EU law write extensively arguing that this is not true. Whether it is true or not is a matter of opinion it's not a fact.

At another stage Ken said that we value the EU in Ireland simply because the Brits themselves are against it. I like Ken and I enjoy his rants but that might be the stupidest thing he's ever said. Aidan also mentioned farmers in the category of persons who have an anti EU sentiment? Fishermen maybe but many farmers are enormously reliant on the EU. If I could think of one industry in the country that would be positive towards the EU's benefits to it's bottom line it's farmers.

The historian who discussed charlottesville didn't act like an expert on the future of America's domestic economy, it's tax rate, the trump presidency, presidential executive power, whether federal government split between the senate / house of reps is democratic, attitude of americans towards migration etc etc

Random nonsense undermined the pod last week I think. Ultimately I don't think one person can't be an expert on EU law, EU UK and national politics, the banking bailot, wealth redistribution, our corporate tax rate, FDI, migration...

corwill · 29-09-2017 11:51AM

Raisins wrote: »

It's the constant generalisations that I have a problem with. I feels a little simplistic. They kept referring to the "political elite" in the pod? Who are they? He obviously means something more than the current government or event the Dail, I'd love to have asked what that means.

"Irish fiscal policies have not redistributed gains from the recovery to the broader population".

Is that actually true? Who is in the "broader" population? What does he mean by re-distribution? I'm not saying I disagree with it but I have a feeling it's a pretty bald assertion that would need detailed argument. You could have at least a pod on that assertion alone.

The pod was littered with casual assertions by Aidan Regan and by Ken that - while I respect them both - I don't think they're qualified to make.

For example, I remember them stating the EU was undemocratic at one stage. Professors in EU law write extensively arguing that this is not true. Whether it is true or not is a matter of opinion it's not a fact.

At another stage Ken said that we value the EU in Ireland simply because the Brits themselves are against it. I like Ken and I enjoy his rants but that might be the stupidest thing he's ever said. Aidan also mentioned farmers in the category of persons who have an anti EU sentiment? Fishermen maybe but many farmers are enormously reliant on the EU. If I could think of one industry in the country that would be positive towards the EU's benefits to it's bottom line it's farmers.

The historian who discussed charlottesville didn't act like an expert on the future of America's domestic economy, it's tax rate, the trump presidency, presidential executive power, whether federal government split between the senate / house of reps is democratic, attitude of americans towards migration etc etc

Random nonsense undermined the pod last week I think. Ultimately I don't think one person can't be an expert on EU law, EU UK and national politics, the banking bailot, wealth redistribution, our corporate tax rate, FDI, migration...

"Political elite" = those in Ireland who between them have the greater share of wealth, privilege and/or political power. Politicians, contributors to political parties, business leaders, those whose opinions hold greatest away in the media. There's no roll of members anywhere that I'm aware of, but I'm surprised that the reference could be thought confusing or even all that ambiguous.

In context, I thought it reasonably clear that "broader population" = those not employed in FDI driven tech sector(s) and who have not experienced similar increases in income and employment opportunities, while still experiencing the inflation brought on by the sectoral recovery and growth elsewhere in the economy.

IMO, the issue with the EU is the appearance of a democratic deficit rather rather than being actually undemocratic, which leaves them open to claims of being undemocratic, and which the EU and it's adherents do a lame job of countering.

Missed the line on farmers being anti-EU, but yeah not sure how that could be sustained.

I think there's only so much two speakers can cover in 45 minutes on a pod, there's only time for so much detail and perspectives.

jaykhunter · 29-09-2017 12:01PM

Deleted some off-topic posts judged to be trolling and subsequent posts following it. Please keep discussion specific to Second Captains

lawred2 · 29-09-2017 12:03PM

Running Balance wrote: »

Correction self serving sporting institution.

no correction needed - I didn't make any statements as to the nature or characteristics of that institution

tomwaits48 · 29-09-2017 12:09PM

Ken in fantastic form in this weeks champions league pod. I lol'd a good few times.

Raisins · 29-09-2017 12:24PM

corwill wrote: »

"Political elite" = those in Ireland who between them have the greater share of wealth, privilege and/or political power. Politicians, contributors to political parties, business leaders, those whose opinions hold greatest away in the media. There's no roll of members anywhere that I'm aware of, but I'm surprised that the reference could be thought confusing or even all that ambiguous.

In context, I thought it reasonably clear that "broader population" = those not employed in FDI driven tech sector(s) and who have not experienced similar increases in income and employment opportunities, while still experiencing the inflation brought on by the sectoral recovery and growth elsewhere in the economy.

IMO, the issue with the EU is the appearance of a democratic deficit rather rather than being actually undemocratic, which leaves them open to claims of being undemocratic, and which the EU and it's adherents do a lame job of countering.

Missed the line on farmers being anti-EU, but yeah not sure how that could be sustained.

I think there's only so much two speakers can cover in 45 minutes on a pod, there's only time for so much detail and perspectives.

That is exactly why the pod could be directed at a topic that can be covered in detail that's not necessarily covered well anywhere else. Charlottesville pod was a great example of that. There's plenty of populist "political elite" bashing, complaining about tax rates and/or austerity, the bank bail out, with a little bit of "what has the EU ever done for me lately?" chat in the media and down the local pub already IMO.

The banking discussion is a case in point. In about 60 seconds they simply stated the EU was generally popular and but that the banking crisis should have made the EU staggeringly unpopular. Ken referenced German capital that benefited from our risky pre crash practices although that common perception has been disproved loads of times. That kind of nonsense annoyed me. He could have done 45 mins on the bail out and the troika and properly either proved or disproved his theory that Ireland was very hard done by.

Arghus · 29-09-2017 01:02PM

Ken's observation about us being generally pro EU because the Brits aren't was an off the cuff remark, not meant to be an explainer for everything - I think there's a grain of truth of it in some cases.

I really don't know why you have such a bee in your bonnet about the pod. The man had done his research and knew what he was talking about and I think they dealt with it as best as they could have in the space of 45 minutes. I would regard a conversation like that as a starting off point for further investigation on the listeners part about the issues raised, not absolutely everything you needed to know. To claim it was nothing better than a pub talk is complete nonsense.

riemann · 29-09-2017 02:35PM

Arghus wrote: »

Ken's observation about us being generally pro EU because the Brits aren't was an off the cuff remark

Off the cuff remarks, stereotyping entire populations, unsubstantiated claims, circular logic.

Pretty much the definition of pubtalk.

bren2001 · 29-09-2017 08:54PM

riemann wrote: »

Off the cuff remarks, stereotyping entire populations, unsubstantiated claims, circular logic.

Pretty much the definition of pubtalk.

Then you should attend conferences and not listen to a podcast.

You've set the bar at a silly standard for this podcast.

30-09-2017 11:37AM

riemann wrote: »

Arghus wrote: »

Ken's observation about us being generally pro EU because the Brits aren't was an off the cuff remark

Off the cuff remarks, stereotyping entire populations, unsubstantiated claims, circular logic.

Pretty much the definition of pubtalk.

Stereotyping entire populations? I didn't hear that. In fact I seem to remember them mentioning OTHER PEOPLE stereotyping populations.

Baggly · 02-10-2017 10:43AM

bren2001 wrote: »

Then you should attend conferences and not listen to a podcast.

You've set the bar at a silly standard for this podcast.

You just dont have the shhtones to set the bar so high :pac:

Arghus · 03-10-2017 02:44AM

Report on Sport without Report on Sport music is a thing that shouldn't be allowed.

threein99 · 04-10-2017 04:20PM

What was the international rules series they were talking about today? I thought it was in Australia this year

dr.kenneth noisewater · 04-10-2017 05:22PM

threein99 wrote:

What was the international rules series they were talking about today? I thought it was in Australia this year

Sounds like an old episode uploaded by mistake

lawred2 · 04-10-2017 05:25PM

Had an actual out loud moment laughing at arrived in a u-boat...

lawred2 · 04-10-2017 05:33PM

threein99 wrote: »

What was the international rules series they were talking about today? I thought it was in Australia this year

Just heard that now..

Wonder what the status of that fifa movie is?

Second Captains

Comments