What have we come to

storker · 21-02-2020 7:22pm

GreeBo wrote: »

The evidence is that Ireland outperformed the rest of the euro zone.

What other evidence would you expect?

I'd want to see evidence of how it was done; evidence of the process. You seem to think the the outcome is sufficient evidence in itself - incidentally, this is not unlike how creationists argue.

In any country, in any scenario, how would you go about proving cause and effect of economic policy?

Seriously? Is that a trick question? I'd start by looking for specific policies or specific budget adjustments that were intended to create more economic activity, and then look at the economic indicators that one might expect to see increase as a result of each policy to make a judgement about its efficacy, and them amalgamate the changes brought by all these policies to see if they come anywhere near accounting for the increase in growth that was shown in the statistics.

Unless you have some method of resetting to the start, implementing a different policy and observing the difference, it would seem you are just being contrarian.

Unless you are prepared to present some evidence to support your claim, it would seem that you're just being credulous and happy to believe something simply on the basis that someone you want to believe has told you it's true.

All we have is a claim that economic growth happened because of FG; that FG was the miracle ingredient without which the growth couldn't have occurred. All I'm asking is, how did they do it? It's a simple enough question, but it's one I've never had an answer to. The response is usually a bit of bluster about this or that, followed by a sound not unlike blowing tumbleweed.

It's no surprise to me that you don't have the answer, because FG don't appear to have it either. I have no doubt that if they did, they'd have been proclaiming it loudly, and they weren't. Perhaps it's a secret... :eek:

growleaves · 21-02-2020 7:55pm

facehugger99 wrote: »

Returning the country to full employment, the bastards!

As the late Raymond Crotty pointed out in 1983, successive Irish governments have achieved full employment in part by the removal through emigration of large numbers of the unemployed population.

A small country which has traditionally 'produced emigrants' is not the same as other larger economic areas.

Taking credit for full employment worked in the past because anyone who didn't have to emigrate tended to have a good standard of living and they weren't in the mood to quibble.

It isn't working now because underemployment and the reduction in wages (relative to inflation) have been so drastic and have immiserated one section of the population while asset inflation has enriched another section of the population.

Diverting the unrest this has created into generational conflict has only been partially successful. Lots of Irish parents identify with their struggling children. Propaganda cliches about 'latte-drinking milennials', which originated with American publications, can only fool a limited amount of people.

Likewise, the robotic invocations of welfare-scroungers. Apart from anything else, the kind of people who perpetrate welfare scams are spending election day in the pub or bookies. They aren't politically astute strategic voters - they're just bums. No, I can't prove this - I know it through anecdotal experience and intuition only.

Shefwedfan · 21-02-2020 7:57pm

Bowie wrote: »

The Charlie Tan-again appointed former RUC/MI5 employee believes a report from 2015 from MI5. Fair play, I'd expect so.
Keep it up please

How is this solving the housing and insurance and health crises and how many f***s do the electorate give to it?

I do love the deflection.....not sure what the smiley faces are for

Billcarson · 21-02-2020 7:57pm

Two paragraphs taken from an article by David McWilliams at the end of last yr.

Housing remains the big failure but as this column has argued over and over, that is a priority or choice the government and electorate choose to make between the interests of landowners and the interests of workers. It has very little to do with economics and everything to do with political choices.

In 2020, if people want to see lower rents and more homes built, they should vote for the parties they believe will make those choices for them and leave the economy itself to continue on its great evolutionary arc.

lawrencesummers · 21-02-2020 8:00pm

The Garda commissioner won’t last long if SF form a government.

jimmycrackcorm · 21-02-2020 8:00pm

Yurt! wrote: »

More credit should be given to the Irish people and less to the likes of Michael Noonan etc for the restored growth in the country.

FG aren't responsible for the steady global economic growth since 2012 or so, and they should really stop trying to take the credit for it.

The housing crisis however, was a failure of inaction and dogma in area where the government had competency and did nothing to stop the slowly evolving train crash. They should carry the can for that one. Ditto with health.

So credit the Greek people for their 16% unemployment in the same period or their Sinn Fein model government?

James Brown · 21-02-2020 8:01pm

Shefwedfan wrote: »

I do love the deflection.....not sure what the smiley faces are for

What deflection? Is that just a go to? I agree that former IRA would be involved with SF.

lawrencesummers · 21-02-2020 8:09pm

Spend 19 million building accommodation on state land and you resolve a lot of homelessness.

https://jrnl.ie/5017050

This is the reason FFG got their arses handed to them, and if they don’t form another coalition the next election will be worse for them.

I said it a while back, it’s going to be a FFG coalition again, they will be terrified of what will happen otherwise., the only question is what they will call it this time because “confidence and supply” can’t be used again.

Shefwedfan · 21-02-2020 8:19pm

lawrencesummers wrote: »

The Garda commissioner won’t last long if SF form a government.

Ahh the SF way, don’t agree and get rid....stupid

James Brown · 21-02-2020 10:21pm

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Ahh the SF way, don’t agree and get rid....stupid

Pity FG weren't so inclined. Might have saved McCabe some suffering and Frances her blushes

Cupatae · 21-02-2020 10:57pm

growleaves wrote: »

As the late Raymond Crotty pointed out in 1983, successive Irish governments have achieved full employment in part by the removal through emigration of large numbers of the unemployed population.

A small country which has traditionally 'produced emigrants' is not the same as other larger economic areas.

Taking credit for full employment worked in the past because anyone who didn't have to emigrate tended to have a good standard of living and they weren't in the mood to quibble.

It isn't working now because underemployment and the reduction in wages (relative to inflation) have been so drastic and have immiserated one section of the population while asset inflation has enriched another section of the population.

Diverting the unrest this has created into generational conflict has only been partially successful. Lots of Irish parents identify with their struggling children. Propaganda cliches about 'latte-drinking milennials', which originated with American publications, can only fool a limited amount of people.

Likewise, the robotic invocations of welfare-scroungers. Apart from anything else, the kind of people who perpetrate welfare scams are spending election day in the pub or bookies. They aren't politically astute strategic voters - they're just bums. No, I can't prove this - I know it through anecdotal experience and intuition only.

Hit the nail on the head

Cupatae · 21-02-2020 10:59pm

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

So credit the Greek people for their 16% unemployment in the same period or their Sinn Fein model government?

I think you LL find the Greek situation is slightly different only ever so slight

Eric Cartman · 21-02-2020 11:03pm

growleaves wrote: »

As the late Raymond Crotty pointed out in 1983, successive Irish governments have achieved full employment in part by the removal through emigration of large numbers of the unemployed population.

A small country which has traditionally 'produced emigrants' is not the same as other larger economic areas.

Taking credit for full employment worked in the past because anyone who didn't have to emigrate tended to have a good standard of living and they weren't in the mood to quibble.

It isn't working now because underemployment and the reduction in wages (relative to inflation) have been so drastic and have immiserated one section of the population while asset inflation has enriched another section of the population.

Diverting the unrest this has created into generational conflict has only been partially successful. Lots of Irish parents identify with their struggling children. Propaganda cliches about 'latte-drinking milennials', which originated with American publications, can only fool a limited amount of people.

Likewise, the robotic invocations of welfare-scroungers. Apart from anything else, the kind of people who perpetrate welfare scams are spending election day in the pub or bookies. They aren't politically astute strategic voters - they're just bums. No, I can't prove this - I know it through anecdotal experience and intuition only.

Our problem occured when we opened up education for people (hold your pitchforks for a second) , in the past we had a lower standard of education, people left to work when times were bad and some returned when times got better a healthy enough cycle. As we gradually handed out free education and particularly reduced cost degrees we have ended up breaking that cycle, when things get bad, our educated skilled labour leaves, the taxation increases which are used by successive governments to keep the country afloat create a barrier which makes it unattractive for those educated skilled workers to return however the generous welfare state attracts unskilled migrants which shore up numbers but increasingly cause a detraction from the economy.

we're effectively breathing out oxygen and in carbon dioxide and with successive boom bust cycles the brain drain continues until eventually the unskilled and the elderly will cause so much demand on the system that the skilled workers cannot afford to support them.

We need a points based system to reject en masse the lower income earning immigrants and all of the welfare dependent ones or the non contributing family members of low to median income earning ones and at the same time decrease taxes to encourage our educated natives back in. There is no good reason at all to allow anyone or their family into this country if their (as a whole unit) contribution to the PRSI system isn't positive.

James Brown · 21-02-2020 11:33pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Our problem occured when we opened up education for people (hold your pitchforks for a second) , in the past we had a lower standard of education, people left to work when times were bad and some returned when times got better a healthy enough cycle. As we gradually handed out free education and particularly reduced cost degrees we have ended up breaking that cycle, when things get bad, our educated skilled labour leaves, the taxation increases which are used by successive governments to keep the country afloat create a barrier which makes it unattractive for those educated skilled workers to return however the generous welfare state attracts unskilled migrants which shore up numbers but increasingly cause a detraction from the economy.

we're effectively breathing out oxygen and in carbon dioxide and with successive boom bust cycles the brain drain continues until eventually the unskilled and the elderly will cause so much demand on the system that the skilled workers cannot afford to support them.

We need a points based system to reject en masse the lower income earning immigrants and all of the welfare dependent ones or the non contributing family members of low to median income earning ones and at the same time decrease taxes to encourage our educated natives back in. There is no good reason at all to allow anyone or their family into this country if their (as a whole unit) contribution to the PRSI system isn't positive.

Nothing healthy about a country having a cycle of vast swathes of youth having to leave to make a living.
I believe a move towards creating industry rather than being a PO box for multinationals might be healthier.

joeguevara · 22-02-2020 12:06am

lawrencesummers wrote: »

The Garda commissioner won’t last long if SF form a government.

He’s 2 years into a 5 year contract of 250k per annum. The minimum to get rid would be 750k but he could sue for unfair dismissal and get another 500k on top. Wouldn’t look good to waste money especially as that is what they have blamed other parties of. If they had evidence of gross misconduct they would already have raised it. We have gone through 3 Garda commissioners with big pay offs. So they would be stymied.

Feisar · 22-02-2020 12:11am

There were TD's from the three main parties on a radio show as I was driving down the road this evening. Yer "up the ra" lad was saying how they respect/follow the institutions of our state. The FF/FG lads missed a trick. They should have requested he condemn the killing of Jerry McCabe. We could have listened to the tramp dance around the issue.

I appreciate they were a necessary evil in NI however it is perfidious to pretend to be anything other than the political wing of the IRA.

JamesM · 22-02-2020 12:33am

Feisar wrote: »

There were TD's from the three main parties on a radio show as I was driving down the road this evening. Yer "up the ra" lad was saying how they respect/follow the institutions of our state. The FF/FG lads missed a trick. They should have requested he condemn the killing of Jerry McCabe. We could have listened to the tramp dance around the issue.

I appreciate they were a necessary evil in NI however it is perfidious to pretend to be anything other than the political wing of the IRA.

They were not a necessary evil in NI. After the British army stopped the attacks on Catholics in 1969, there was no need for the IRA. They just went on a spree of murder and mayhem. This led to Bloody Sunday in 1972 and all the other atrocities on both sides.

Professor Moriarty · 22-02-2020 12:34am

JamesM wrote: »

They were not a necessary evil in NI. After the British army stopped the attacks on Catholics in 1969, there was no need for the IRA. They just went on a spree of murder and mayhem. This led to Bloody Sunday in 1972 and all the other atrocities on both sides.

No. Paratroopers shooting civilians led to Bloody Sunday.

growleaves · 22-02-2020 12:39am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Our problem occured when we opened up education for people (hold your pitchforks for a second) , in the past we had a lower standard of education, people left to work when times were bad and some returned when times got better a healthy enough cycle. As we gradually handed out free education and particularly reduced cost degrees we have ended up breaking that cycle, when things get bad, our educated skilled labour leaves, the taxation increases which are used by successive governments to keep the country afloat create a barrier which makes it unattractive for those educated skilled workers to return however the generous welfare state attracts unskilled migrants which shore up numbers but increasingly cause a detraction from the economy.

we're effectively breathing out oxygen and in carbon dioxide and with successive boom bust cycles the brain drain continues until eventually the unskilled and the elderly will cause so much demand on the system that the skilled workers cannot afford to support them.

We need a points based system to reject en masse the lower income earning immigrants and all of the welfare dependent ones or the non contributing family members of low to median income earning ones and at the same time decrease taxes to encourage our educated natives back in. There is no good reason at all to allow anyone or their family into this country if their (as a whole unit) contribution to the PRSI system isn't positive.

Interesting post.

I'd say that the success of employers in defeating collective bargaining among the unskilled and semi-skilled plays a part in the cycle you allude to.

When people hear collective bargaining they think of trade unionism but there is a wide spectrum of formal and informal methods of collective bargaining. Actuaries have accreditation and guild protection (of a sort, not quite sure how it works). Business executives have their links to hockey and rugby clubs and place their network of friends into positions of influence. In-house corporate attorneys report to other attorneys (not to some manager in the bureaucracy and not by accident). In Montrose, and the entertainment industry generally, its usually well-placed family connections. Etc., etc.

I think this bears emphasis because on Boards we seem to have a large proliferation of the only kind of middle-class person who doesn't use collective bargaining and is in fact blissfully unaware of it: the IT worker. In time, wages will be driven down in IT and in fact that's already happening from what I've observed.

Anti-racism makes collective bargaining impossible for unskilled workers. If an Irish construction worker objects to a Romanian labourer taking a day rate at a 500% discount, no one will accept that his objection is free from prejudice. There is an assumption of guilt attached to such accusations.

Why am I going on about all this....because the money that could be negotiated from employers comes out of taxation instead. The middle-class give a subsidy to the lesser-skilled classes in the form of welfare, then resent them and we all go around in circles.

Eric Cartman · 22-02-2020 12:42am

growleaves wrote: »

Interesting post.

I'd say that the success of employers in defeating collective bargaining among the unskilled and semi-skilled plays a part in the cycle you allude to.

When people hear collective bargaining they think of trade unionism but there is a wide spectrum of formal and informal methods of collective bargaining. Actuaries have accreditation and guild protection (of a sort, not quite sure how it works). Business executives have their links to hockey and rugby clubs and place their network of friends into positions of influence. In-house corporate attorneys report to other attorneys (not to some manager in the bureaucracy and not by accident). In Montrose, and the entertainment industry generally, its usually well-placed family connections. Etc., etc.

I think this bears emphasis because on Boards we seem to have a large proliferation of the only kind of middle-class person who doesn't use collective bargaining and is in fact blissfully unaware of it: the IT worker. In time, wages will be driven down in IT and in fact that's already happening from what I've observed.

Anti-racism makes collective bargaining impossible for unskilled workers. If an Irish construction worker objects to a Romanian labourer taking a day rate at a 500% discount, no one will accept that his objection is free from prejudice. There is an assumption of guilt attached to such accusations.

Why am I going on about all this....because the money that could be negotiated from employers comes out of taxation instead. The middle-class give a subsidy to the lesser-skilled classes in the form of welfare, then resent them and we all go around in circles.

Collective bargaining is the first step down the union slippery slope, your labbour rate is based on volountary participation and your own skillset and experience. The idea that a rugby club protects your income is laughable.

James Brown · 22-02-2020 12:42am

Feisar wrote: »

There were TD's from the three main parties on a radio show as I was driving down the road this evening. Yer "up the ra" lad was saying how they respect/follow the institutions of our state. The FF/FG lads missed a trick. They should have requested he condemn the killing of Jerry McCabe. We could have listened to the tramp dance around the issue.

I appreciate they were a necessary evil in NI however it is perfidious to pretend to be anything other than the political wing of the IRA.

Yer man is a tool.
The whole point of the IRA was fair and equal representation with the ultimate goal of the British leaving. That's my understanding. Now its political as it is in the south.

Agreed. They need deny it because the IRA were an illegal organisation.

growleaves · 22-02-2020 12:48am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Collective bargaining is the first step down the union slippery slope, your labbour rate is based on volountary participation and your own skillset and experience.

The slippery slope to what?

Eric Cartman · 22-02-2020 12:52am

growleaves wrote: »

The slippery slope to what?

to unionisation which increases consumer prices, stifles productivity, discourages company expansion in that ragion, takes money from ordinary workers to fund fat cat union officials and hurts chances of workers heing promoted to managerial levels

lawrencesummers · 22-02-2020 12:55am

JamesM wrote: »

They were not a necessary evil in NI. After the British army stopped the attacks on Catholics in 1969, there was no need for the IRA. They just went on a spree of murder and mayhem. This led to Bloody Sunday in 1972 and all the other atrocities on both sides.

Yea.
Sure.
Yea they did nothing wrong since 1969 alright.
And I’m Meghan markel.

lawrencesummers · 22-02-2020 12:56am

joeguevara wrote: »

He’s 2 years into a 5 year contract of 250k per annum. The minimum to get rid would be 750k but he could sue for unfair dismissal and get another 500k on top. Wouldn’t look good to waste money especially as that is what they have blamed other parties of. If they had evidence of gross misconduct they would already have raised it. We have gone through 3 Garda commissioners with big pay offs. So they would be stymied.

A lot of IF’s, but if SF do get in they May not care what the cost is.

JamesM · 22-02-2020 1:03am

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

No. Paratroopers shooting civilians led to Bloody Sunday.

They wouldn't have if the IRA weren't active. There was no need to be active - ambushing the police and the army that, at that time, were protecting the Catholic population.
Before you attack me, I do not condone it. It was a terrible day - and I'm old enough to remember it very clearly - it was horrific and we all hated the paras and the arrogant way they treated the civilians afterwards.

lawrencesummers · 22-02-2020 1:04am

JamesM wrote: »

They wouldn't have if the IRA weren't active. There was no need to be active - ambushing the police and the army that, at that time, were protecting the Catholic population.
Before you attack me, I do not condone it. It was a terrible day - and I'm old enough to remember it very clearly - it was horrific and we all hated the paras and the arrogant way they treated the civilians afterwards.

So Bloody Sunday is the IRA’s fault.

I’ve heard it all now.

Professor Moriarty · 22-02-2020 1:10am

JamesM wrote: »

They wouldn't have if the IRA weren't active. There was no need to be active - ambushing the police and the army that, at that time, were protecting the Catholic population.
Before you attack me, I do not condone it. It was a terrible day - and I'm old enough to remember it very clearly - it was horrific and we all hated the paras and the arrogant way they treated the civilians afterwards.

There was endemic discrimination in NI at that time which wasn't being addressed in any meaningful way and people weren't going to take it anymore. If there had been parity of esteem then there would have been a much smaller IRA - if it had existed at all. Britain created a second terrible beauty that Sunday.

Feisar · 22-02-2020 1:24am

JamesM wrote: »

They were not a necessary evil in NI. After the British army stopped the attacks on Catholics in 1969, there was no need for the IRA. They just went on a spree of murder and mayhem. This led to Bloody Sunday in 1972 and all the other atrocities on both sides.

I don't understand.

hatrickpatrick · 22-02-2020 1:42am

GreeBo wrote: »

The evidence is that Ireland outperformed the rest of the euro zone.

What other evidence would you expect? In any country, in any scenario, how would you go about proving cause and effect of economic policy?

Unless you have some method of resetting to the start, implementing a different policy and observing the difference, it would seem you are just being contrarian.

It's irrelevant. Macroeconomics has become entirely disconnected from average quality of life for a variety of reasons, and this is exactly what FG's problem is - obsessing over numbers and graphs on paper and not actually listening to people when huge, huge numbers of voters tell them that their lives have become worse, not better, as a result of economic "recovery" which has seen everything becoming more and more expensive without an increase in take-home pay which even begins to cover it.

As I've said ad nauseum in this thread already, when an entire generation was able to afford a higher standard of living on a part time income during the worst years of austerity than they are now on full time career incomes during a period of macroeconomic recovery, the obvious conclusion is that macroeconomics don't tell us sh!t about conditions on the ground which are actually having a direct impact on peoples' spending power and quality of life.

So, the macroeconomic figures and graphs all point to Ireland being in a good place. It. Does. Not. Matter. Ordinary people's lives are harder now than they were ten years ago because of rampant in key areas of the cost of living.

Here's another analogy: If your house is burning down around you and you're suffering third degree burns while your thermometer tells you that your house is a comfortable 21 degrees C, do you conclude that the evidence of your burns and the fact that your house is now a pile of ash is false, and the thermostat was correct?

No, you conclude that the thermometer was faulty in some way and therefore not capable of telling you what was really happening inside your house at the time that it showed a good temperature while you got badly burned by the inferno.

This is a situation like that. If the macroeconomic figures are telling us that things are good, while average lived experience is getting worse and worse over time, then the macroeconomic figures and formulae are worthless in determining anything about how citizens should feel or indeed how citizens should vote.

Abstract numbers and graphs which take into account gigantic factors which have very little direct impact on day to day life say everything's rosy. Individual human beings say that they cannot afford the cost of rent, groceries, heating and electricity bills, insurance and other basic costs of living without being financially crushed. The latter is all that matters when it comes to determining whether government policy has or has not been a success.

Peoples' quality of life has diminished as the cost of living has outstripped income, and ordinary voters literally couldn't give a bollocks about anything else when it comes to voting on economic issues. They don't care if the macroeconomic figures are solid, they don't care if the stock market is up, they don't care about GDP, they don't care about indices and graphs. They care that what they take home on payday after a hard week's work doesn't go as far as it used to before FG took office in 2011. And that is literally the only metric upon which average voters are going to judge a government's performance on economic policy.

What have we come to

Comments