Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Who is the best/worst Taoiseach in modern times?

Options
245

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    PhilOssophy
    Registered Users Posts: 2,114 ✭✭✭PhilOssophy


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    they also didnt tackle the inefficiencies in private sector either

    What? And why would that be their responsibility? Did I read that right?

    The big difference is that one is paid by the state and the other is paid by somebody else. It is hardly up to them to tell companies who are paying their wages how to run their businesses!


  • Options
    #33
    An Ri rua
    Registered Users Posts: 4,475 ✭✭✭An Ri rua


    mr_fegelien wrote: »
    Leo seems to be like Obama in the sense that he's made strides in terms of being the first Indian politician and first gay politician but his policies were average at best and incompetent at worst.

    Brian Cowen stands out as the worst we've had but yet some laud him for bringing Ireland out of the Great Recession that happened in 08'. What do you think?

    The question more aptly is 'Do you think, Mr Fegelien?'
    Brian Cowen lost his mother yesterday. Could you not take your head out of your ass before starting thread after thread?? Google is your friend.


  • Options
    #34
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,810 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    PhilOssophy wrote: »
    What? And why would that be their responsibility? Did I read that right?

    The big difference is that one is paid by the state and the other is paid by somebody else. It is hardly up to them to tell companies who are paying their wages how to run their businesses!

    we never talk about the inefficiencies of the private sector, apparently is far better than the public sector!


  • Options
    #35
    PhilOssophy
    Registered Users Posts: 2,114 ✭✭✭PhilOssophy


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    we never talk about the inefficiencies of the private sector, apparently is far better than the public sector!

    Strange logic.....

    The reason we don't talk about it is because it is not costing the tax payer, if Paddy Murphy wants to pay 5 people to do something inefficiently, more the power to Paddy!
    It is a different kettle of fish when the tax payer is footing the bill. Then people are entitled to expect value for money.


  • Options
    #36
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,810 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    PhilOssophy wrote: »
    Strange logic.....

    The reason we don't talk about it is because it is not costing the tax payer, if Paddy Murphy wants to pay 5 people to do something inefficiently, more the power to Paddy!
    It is a different kettle of fish when the tax payer is footing the bill. Then people are entitled to expect value for money.

    we seemed to have forgotten what happened only a few years ago, there was a reason why we experienced a 'credit crisis'!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    PhilOssophy
    Registered Users Posts: 2,114 ✭✭✭PhilOssophy


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    we seemed to have forgotten what happened only a few years ago, there was a reason why we experienced a 'credit crisis'!

    And what had that got to do with inefficiency? It was poor regulation by our elected representatives, and the financial regulator/dept of finance being asleep at the wheel, which was largely responsible for that, no?


  • Options
    #38
    whisky_galore
    Registered Users Posts: 15,782 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Not defending Dev here, but for all the bad things you can say about him, this is the least accurate or damning.

    The Irish Constitution is one of the most liberating and democratic documents protecting their citizens from tyranny ever written. Why? Because it didn't stick 21st centaury citizens of Ireland with the same vision people had in the 1920's or 30's. The people change the constitution, not the government.
    .

    People now in the 21st cent tend to forget that Ireland was like a different planet then. The church was in the driving seat in many aspects of Irish life, and here's the kicker...most people liked and wanted it that way. Anyone who didn't like it had the simple choice to suck it up or leave. Like Mrs Doyle, maybe they liked the misery.

    No politician would last long on a collision course with the RCC, the people, not to mind the church, wouldn't have any of it.

    The RCC scandals culpability lie as much with the church as with ordinary people, functionaries of the State, Gardai etc, who knew damn well what was going on, aided, abeited and supported the church, even hurled members of their own families into laundries.


  • Options
    #39
    Mikefitzs
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Mikefitzs


    Bertie or Leo for best and Enda for worst.

    Just a passenger



  • Options
    #40
    gmisk
    Registered Users Posts: 31,863 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    MM is time limited but he is making a good run at worst already imo


  • Options
    #41
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,810 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    PhilOssophy wrote: »
    And what had that got to do with inefficiency? It was poor regulation by our elected representatives, and the financial regulator/dept of finance being asleep at the wheel, which was largely responsible for that, no?

    you are indeed correct, but in true free market style, this is in fact, only a part of the story, you ll find 'credit' is generally created by private sector financial institutions, otherwise known as banks! id class an over reliance and an over supply of credit from these banks, as, 'inefficiencies' of the private sector


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Mikefitzs wrote: »
    Bertie or Leo for best and Enda for worst.
    Lemass is at the top of the list as he created these modern times, Cowan at the bottom, everyone else just jockeys up and down in positions.


  • Options
    #43
    IAMAMORON
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,078 ✭✭✭IAMAMORON


    whisky_galore wrote: »
    People now in the 21st cent tend to forget that Ireland was like a different planet then. The church was in the driving seat in many aspects of Irish life, and here's the kicker...most people liked and wanted it that way. Anyone who didn't like it had the simple choice to suck it up or leave. Like Mrs Doyle, maybe they liked the misery.

    No politician would last long on a collision course with the RCC, the people, not to mind the church, wouldn't have any of it.

    The RCC scandals culpability lie as much with the church as with ordinary people, functionaries of the State, Gardai etc, who knew damn well what was going on, aided, abeited and supported the church, even hurled members of their own families into laundries.

    It is a fair comment Whiskey. the church did have a lot of power. But in fairness the gunmen played into their hands. When the Brits turned off the financial taps the Government was broke. We had no education or health service, they had to placate the church to provide these basic services. The quid pro quo was the church being allowed to rule from the pulpit. Their influence was more a result of a power vacuum as opposed to the Irish people suddenly finding god overnight.


  • Options
    #44
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    we never talk about the inefficiencies of the private sector, apparently is far better than the public sector!

    Inefficiencies of the public sector get paid by the tax payer, a company that is consistently efficient to the same degree as the HSE or DoE are over taken by their competitors and or go out of business. Just look what is happening to An Post at the minute.


  • Options
    #45
    Mikefitzs
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Mikefitzs


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Lemass is at the top of the list as he created these modern times, Cowan at the bottom, everyone else just jockeys up and down in positions.

    In my silly little mind I’d regard 40 years as modern times. So since 1980.

    Just a passenger



  • Options
    #46
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,810 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    skooterblue2 wrote: »
    Inefficiencies of the public sector get paid by the tax payer, a company that is consistently efficient to the same degree as the HSE or DoE are over taken by their competitors and or go out of business. Just look what is happening to An Post at the minute.

    do they really! we really do have short memories!

    baring in mind, amazon makes little or nothing from its delivery services!


  • Options
    #47
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Mikefitzs wrote: »
    In my silly little mind I’d regard 40 years as modern times. So since 1980.
    There is no 1980 without Lemass! :) So the question should be "Apart from Lemass who is....?"! That will include everyone else except Liam Cosgrave and Jack Lynch anyway.


  • Options
    #48
    amacca
    Registered Users Posts: 6,767 ✭✭✭amacca


    PhilOssophy wrote: »
    And what had that got to do with inefficiency? It was poor regulation by our elected representatives, and the financial regulator/dept of finance being asleep at the wheel, which was largely responsible for that, no?

    Imo Banking used to be the preserve of the cautious rarher boring pinstripe suit wearing bean counter, bit rich (excuse the pun) to pin it all on regulator, id say private sector sales/bonus mentality and handing out unsound loans left right and center means they need to shoulder some of the responsibility......i got the distinct impression the banks were nearly telling the regulator what to do in the run up to the bubble bursting......it was one big merry go round with a lot of vested private sector interests as well as the public sector ..... auctioneers/estate agents, media hawking property left right snd centre (unwilling to give up the advertisement revenue stream), developers and subcontractors etc etc ... if you want a regulators to regulate you hsve to make them properly independent .....instead of a fox guarding a chicken coop it was like a chicken attempting to corral a pack of wolves....then hes wheeled out as a patsy in the aftermath as if not being a strong enough regulator was his fault......he would have been out of his job if he did it properly imo.....the fault lies more with successive govts incentivising the whole thing and private sector jumping on board with zero care about long term consequences, none of them wanted to cry halt while the "party" was in full swing and each still wants to blame the other for the mess they left behind rather than fix it properly......why? because fixing it is boring and long term and requires sacrifice......and they all just want to return to the short term party......


  • Options
    #49
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    do they really! we really do have short memories!

    baring in mind, amazon makes little or nothing from its delivery services!

    They dont need to, it probably suits accounting. They have one of the biggest shares of online retail (share price is over 1000 a share and growing). DHL wanted to come into Ireland about 25 years ago to buy An Posts parcel delivery service. They told the minister they wanted the delivery service but didnt want to deal with An Post and the unions.

    Both parties left the table unresolved. An Post has lost most of billing services (gone electronic), their financial services are outsourced and they are the front office sales, parcel service is more expensive, its a mess of a company. Then there are the dopes who put money into prize bonds, you would be better off with mattress money.

    Parcel Force, DHL. Elan and loads more are the choice of private industry. They could easily have been Deutche Post. But what are they do to? They were put there with a "never ever" job for life with pension. Why should they have to compete?


  • Options
    #50
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,810 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    skooterblue2 wrote: »
    They dont need to, it probably suits accounting. They have one of the biggest shares of online retail (share price is over 1000 a share and growing). DHL wanted to come into Ireland about 25 years ago to buy An Posts parcel delivery service. They told the minister they wanted the delivery service but didnt want to deal with An Post and the unions.

    Both parties left the table unresolved. An Post has lost most of billing services (gone electronic), their financial services are outsourced and they are the front office sales, parcel service is more expensive, its a mess of a company. Then there are the dopes who put money into prize bonds, you would be better off with mattress money.

    Parcel Force, DHL. Elan and loads more are the choice of private industry. They could easily have been Deutche Post. But what are they do to? They were put there with a "never ever" job for life with pension. Why should they have to compete?

    how can you compete against a major player such as amazon, when they make little or no profit from their main business?


  • Options
    #51
    KaneToad
    Registered Users Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭KaneToad


    Best: Lemass, Fitzgerald, Reynolds, Kenny
    Worst: Haughey, Ahern


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    antimatterx
    Registered Users Posts: 2,671 ✭✭✭antimatterx


    KaneToad wrote: »
    Best: Lemass, Fitzgerald, Reynolds, Kenny
    Worst: Haughey, Ahern

    He was far from the worse, up there with the best. Being corrupt doesn't make your policies any worse.


  • Options
    #53
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    how can you compete against a major player such as amazon, when they make little or no profit from their main business?

    An Post never HAD to compete with anyone before. The management were historically bullied by the Unions. They didnt diversify, they didnt keep an eye on costs.
    Meanwhile over in Germany Deutche Post was diversifying into internet providing. An Post was thinking doesnt affect me mate because I will always have me job and me pension afterwards.

    Now suddenly all the billing is gone electronic, banking is electronic, rural post offices have gone from stable fixed fixtures to contracts operated by corner shops. Their financial services are uncompetitive and dated.

    Amazon make massive profits which cover the costs of a break even service. An Post should have been looking to the future.


  • Options
    #54
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,810 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    skooterblue2 wrote:
    Amazon make massive profits which cover the costs of a break even service. An Post should have been looking to the future.


    Amazon doesn't make money from its delivery service, it is in fact a monopoly of the industry, it probably makes most of its money via its IT activities and it's financial activities, .I.e. value of its assets etc, in particular it's share price etc


  • Options
    #55
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    Amazon doesn't make money from its delivery service, it is in fact a monopoly of the industry, it probably makes most of its money via its IT activities and it's financial activities, .I.e. value of its assets etc, in particular it's share price etc

    That is not being debated. The problem is that An Post never was looking forward. What is being debated is whether the taxpayer should have to subsidise a failing service. Most of it is its own historical fault as an organisation.


  • Options
    #56
    Jimbob1977
    Registered Users Posts: 2,239 ✭✭✭Jimbob1977


    I don't vote Fianna Fail, but I have to admire Bertie Ahern for his role in delivering the Good Friday Agreement.

    Plenty of groundwork was established by his predecessors. However it was marvellous to see the warring factions sitting at the same table and not waking up to the latest RTE or BBC report of a murder. Bertie worked hard on that process, despite his flaws.

    Brian Cowan presided over an economic collapse that was a combination of domestic and global mismanagement. He had no answers.


  • Options
    #57
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    antimatterx wrote: »
    He was far from the worse, up there with the best. Being corrupt doesn't make your policies any worse.

    Haughey? Charmed Thatcher, charmed Mitterand, charmed Kohl some legend of a man.


  • Options
    #58
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,810 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    skooterblue2 wrote:
    That is not being debated. The problem is that An Post never was looking forward. What is being debated is whether the taxpayer should have to subsidise a failing service. Most of it is its own historical fault as an organisation.


    It is a critical component of it though, how can public and private sector businesses compete under such conditions? it's simply not possible to compete against such a huge company, when they can use other elements of their business to undermine a whole sector, its pure monopolisation.

    There's no question that our critical public industries didn't keep up with such advancements, but how do you do that against an IT giant such as amazon, and under the monopolising conditions mentioned? It's also important to note the public sector benefits and supports, companies such as amazon have aquired over the years.


  • Options
    #59
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    It is a critical component of it though, how can public and private sector businesses compete under such conditions? it's simply not possible to compete against such a huge company, when they can use other elements of their business to undermine a whole sector, its pure monopolisation.

    There's no question that our critical public industries didn't keep up with such advancements, but how do you do that against an IT giant such as amazon, and under the monopolising conditions mentioned? It's also important to note the public sector benefits and supports, companies such as amazon have aquired over the years.

    Amazon has only happened in the last 10 years or so. An Post never diversified kept up with technology over the years. They never anticipated or took any steps to prepare for the internet.

    My mother used to work for the P&T and she used to tell me about the abuses. Using the franking machine for personal post, using the vehicles for personal use, accidents caused by drink driving, telephone poles going missing, strikes over petty squabbles in sub post offices. All that crap.

    None of this would be tolerated in private industry.


  • Options
    #60
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,810 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    skooterblue2 wrote:
    None of this would be tolerated in private industry.


    But inefficiencies such as monopolisation, rent seeking, bailouts, tax avoidance, etc all seem to be fine in the private sector, particularly in relation to large corporations....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 21,518 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    But inefficiencies such as monopolisation, rent seeking, bailouts, tax avoidance, etc all seem to be fine in the private sector, particularly in relation to large corporations....

    They're not inefficiencies. They are immoral practices. I get what you are doing but you're not comparing apples with apples.

    And, undoubtedly there are immoral practices, if not outright illegal ones frequently carried out by businesses (private and public). Because either industry type behaves in a far from ideal manner, it is not an excuse for the other.


Advertisement