What Should Ireland Seek To Excel In?

Sand · 08-01-2010 11:38PM

Nobody is going to invest in shipbuilding in Ireland because its a terrible idea with no return. The End.

See? I have expressed your own claimed view better than you have.

EDIT - Actually, I'll hold my hand up here - you did say those who do, do it elsewhere or words to that effect. So you do agree with the above summary, that the investment in shipbuilding ( or any industry) flows to the greatest return. Which is not Ireland.

Apologies.

Welease · 08-01-2010 11:45PM

Sand wrote: »

Nobody is going to invest in shipbuilding in Ireland because its a terrible idea with no return. The End.

See? I have expressed your own claimed view better than you have.

ok you seem to be ignoring my posts, and have a specific issue with me. Please Pm me, i wont ruin this thread.

Edit - Just saw your edit.. lol yeah i think its a horrendous idea.. but in fairness to you, i didnt bother commenting because i may be surprised and those with data can prove its an awesome idea

So no issues..

My comments were to those who advocate no government involvement in their ideas for shipbuilding.. essentially who the *** would fund that folly.. which is pretty much your point also

imme · 09-01-2010 12:14AM

Sand wrote: »

Nobody is going to invest in shipbuilding in Ireland because its a terrible idea with no return. The End.

See? I have expressed your own claimed view better than you have.

EDIT - Actually, I'll hold my hand up here - you did say those who do, do it elsewhere or words to that effect. So you do agree with the above summary, that the investment in shipbuilding ( or any industry) flows to the greatest return. Which is not Ireland.

Apologies.

what would we do without you Sand:cool:. Clarifying peoples' positions for them.:D
I don't know that shipbuilding on a grand scale is going anywhere, it's dead in the water you could say!
It was one view expressed on here, there have been others.
Can we have more please.

Positivity/Enthusiasm is infectious you know.;)

Sand · 09-01-2010 12:19AM

It was one view expressed on here, there have been others.

True, but the important point is that governments cant predict the next big thing. Even entrepreneurs cant. If someone told you he was going to start a business like taxback.com would you be absolutely certain it would succeed? Would you be willing to bet other peoples money on it?

It comes back to the essential point - our government only needs to create an entrepreneur friendly arena, and focus on pushing for free trade internationally. Thats it. Thats the extent of the required economic policy required. Leave it to the guys with the ideas to come up with the next Irish success story.

admiralofthefleet · 09-01-2010 12:21AM

green energy for definite. wind, wave electricity generation etc..

Sand · 09-01-2010 12:23AM

Green energy can be incentivised through the very simple and thus elegant solution of taxing pollution. Theres no need for grants and trying to pick a particular form of green energy, or a defintion of green energy thats going to be outdated by developments in the market. Ironcially, the balanced meeting point between green demands and power demands may be nuclear power. Which is irrationally resisted by the supposed Green agenda.

imme · 09-01-2010 12:25AM

Sand wrote: »

True, but the important point is that governments cant predict the next big thing. Even entrepreneurs cant. If someone told you he was going to start a business like taxback.com would you be absolutely certain it would succeed? Would you be willing to bet other peoples money on it?

It comes back to the essential point - our government only needs to create an entrepreneur friendly arena, and focus on pushing for free trade internationally. Thats it. Thats the extent of the required economic policy required. Leave it to the guys with the ideas to come up with the next Irish success story.

My opening post asked what role government should play if at all, it was open to posters to decide.
The the government can adopt a role or not, either way their facilitation of entrepreneurship is key imo.

imme · 09-01-2010 12:30AM

Sand wrote: »

Green energy can be incentivised through the very simple and thus elegant solution of taxing pollution. Theres no need for grants and trying to pick a particular form of green energy, or a defintion of green energy thats going to be outdated by developments in the market. Ironcially, the balanced meeting point between green demands and power demands may be nuclear power. Which is irrationally resisted by the supposed Green agenda.

that sounds like you're in favour of the recently introduced carbon tax???
I find that surprising, maybe you're not in favour of it?

You picked holes in someone's shipbuilding scheme earlier, now you're advocating nuclear energy. If we're struggling to fund Transport 21 I don't see how we'd fund the billions required for nuclear energy.

Welease · 09-01-2010 12:54AM

Sand wrote: »

It comes back to the essential point - our government only needs to create an entrepreneur friendly arena, and focus on pushing for free trade internationally. Thats it. Thats the extent of the required economic policy required. Leave it to the guys with the ideas to come up with the next Irish success story.

It's easy to make glib statements like that.. How do they create an entrepreneur friendly environment? (ignoring the previous statements by others for zero government involvement).

Ideas will come, but with limited capital available through banks etc. and the fact the post is about the next big thing for Ireland.. what steps would need to take place for to make that happen? It that not too huge a leap for individual entrepreneurs alone?

Welease · 09-01-2010 01:11AM

Sand wrote: »

Green energy can be incentivised through the very simple and thus elegant solution of taxing pollution. Theres no need for grants and trying to pick a particular form of green energy, or a defintion of green energy thats going to be outdated by developments in the market. Ironcially, the balanced meeting point between green demands and power demands may be nuclear power. Which is irrationally resisted by the supposed Green agenda.

Taxing pollution doesn't create an sustainable industry that can bring in foreign investment though

and is probably not something we should strive to excel in

There could be a need for grants to encourage entrepreneurs in the development of green technologies, and next generation capture/storage devices. The world is looking for cost effective devices to harness renewable energy and control energy usage.

Sand · 09-01-2010 01:22AM

It's easy to make glib statements like that.. How do they create an entrepreneur friendly environment? (ignoring the previous statements by others for zero government involvement).

I have already made suggestions but I dont claim to be all knowing and all seeing. Thats the realm of the statists.

Taxing pollution doesn't create an sustainable industry that can bring in foreign investment though

That the height of Irish economic policy can be summarised as getting foreign investment is a bit sad.

There could be a need for grants to encourage entrepreneurs in the development of green technologies, and next generation capture/storage devices.

Wrong end of the stick, it assumes the bureacrats are smarter than the entrepreneurs. Theyre not.

Green Back · 09-01-2010 01:50AM

imme wrote: »

What should Ireland seek to excel in. What sector of the economy should be encouraged/facilitated by government.

Potatoes.

The international potato trade was estimated to be worth US$660 billion on 2008.
http://www.potato2008.org/en/potato/economy.html
The United Nations officially named 2008 as the International Year of the Potato,
The government should be focusing their attention on getting a bigger slice of the trade. Starting with a 5% tax cap on patato producing farms.

With our understanding of this cherished vegetable we should be world beaters!

Amhran Nua · 09-01-2010 10:50AM

Daithinski wrote: »

+1
This isn't the first outlandish idea that has been put out there by Amhrán Nua.

IMHO its not a good strategy for Amhrán Nua to be getting involved on boards.ie debates, probably only going to put people off them...

Usually the only ones interested in stifling debate are those who wish the status quo to remain in place, to be honest.

Sand wrote: »

You condemn that view as being dogmatic libertarianism in what I assume is supposed to be a disapproving, negative fashion.

Your view flies in the face of historical evidence, unfortunately. None of the major industrial powers magically appeared in a flourish of entrepreneurship.

Sand wrote: »

I find it hard to conceive of a view that considers such a balance of power in negative terms is anything other than dogmatically statist, where the state always knows best...assuming you are the state of course.

Hardly. The state should provide incentive and direction, especially where little exists. If a business is unable to stand on its own merits thereafter, of course it should fail, things are not as black and white as portrated here.

Sand wrote: »

I have to give you credit Amhran Nua, whilst I like to laugh at the near weekly "Lets start a new political party - Heres my crazed quasi nationalist socialist manifesto" posts in the Politics forum, you at least have the quality of longevity. Whatever about the quasi nationalist reaching with the name in a language no one speaks but apparently everyone wishes they could. But if your root philosophy somehow sees the state as the generous benefactor of the righteous citizen, as opposed to the servant of citizens then I am quite glad your power and influence extends only to casting a vote, posting on boards.ie and maintaining a web site.

Thats nice, but when the discussion becomes about the poster rather than the post, it usually means you haven't much else to support your position.

Sand wrote: »

Speaking as a citizen who prefers to see the state serving my interests, rather than as a grateful slave competeing for the favour of the state.

Libertarianism is corporate feudalism, the ultimate in social darwinism, and is therefore the quickest route to slavery you are likely to find. The state is not some alien entity descended from the nether to control everything, its an organisation of citizens whose purpose is ostensibly to help their fellow citizens.

Sand wrote: »

I dont doubt your claims, Id only point to Adam Smiths more famous postulation of the "invisible hand" which directly references participants without perfect knowledge.

Was this not one of the justifications for the relaxing of regulation which lead directly to the current global economic collapse?

Sand wrote: »

This is where bureacrats try to decide which industry is going to being the wealth generator for years to come...and this is why we have an oversupply of empty hotels in this country. Given the current chit chat we are going to have an oversupply of unused windmills and other castles in the sky...

So you're holding up the failings of past governments as the reason why no future government could possibly ever succeed in providing direction to the economy. I see.

Sand wrote: »

I think our difference on that that comes back to your own belief that the state is somehow guided by philosopher kings that are always more correct than their grateful serfs toiling in the fields to fund their great works, or that it ought to be. You're hoping to guide the future of this state, right?

So again, you have no substantive points to make here?

Sand wrote: »

I remember a wise man recognising that wisdom was recognising that you didnt know everything. Funnily enough, free market economics is based on the same basic philosophy.

I wonder was the abolition of the Glass-Steagall act based on that philosophy.

Sand wrote: »

Maybe if socialists and libertarians are disagreeing with you, you are just wrong?

If the wingnuts on both ends of the political spectrum disagree but most other people seem to find the ideas amenable, you've probably hit the sweet spot. But again, we're talking about ideas for Ireland to excel, not slinging mud at particular posters.

Sand wrote: »

It cant be discounted as a possibility. I mean, christ, shipbuilding? Castles in the sky.

Ireland needs industrial infrastructure and that is one route that has been historically used to achieve this goal successfully by the US, Japan, Korea and China. As already mentioned exhaustively, its not a direction for a major national push. It is however a direction that needs to be explored.

I don't know, looking back over all the effort put into that post, and the lack of any real points or objections beyond carping from a safe pseudonymous position at real efforts to improve our mutual position beyond making the aforementioned posts on the internet, one can't help but feel you might have been better served by watching telly for a while.

Amhran Nua · 09-01-2010 11:00AM

Sand wrote: »

True, but the important point is that governments cant predict the next big thing. Even entrepreneurs cant. If someone told you he was going to start a business like taxback.com would you be absolutely certain it would succeed? Would you be willing to bet other peoples money on it?

Entrepreneurship needs risk in order to be successful, otherwise everyone would be doing it and it would be called the day job. If this risk is spread cross a wide enough portfolio of projects with a bit of reasonable analysis behind them, you offset the failures with the success stories, since failures only happen once, while success keeps on giving. Obviously success means being able to stand and grow without government assistance.

Sand wrote: »

Leave it to the guys with the ideas to come up with the next Irish success story.

These would be the same guys who thought we could all get rich buying and selling houses to each other forever? Or to put it another way, how do you know your enterprise friendly environment (which would be a good thing) won't just get channelled into starting another property boom (which would be a bad thing). Or are you in fact in favour of disincentivising some industries after all?

OMD · 09-01-2010 11:46AM

Perhaps to get an answer to the question "what should Ireland excel in?" someone should define what they mean by "excel in" and then state why Ireland should excel in any area.

I would think excel means be one of the best in the world at something. If so, the answer to the question is "nothing". It may be nice to excel but it is not necessary and may even be harmful.

Permabear · 09-01-2010 12:38PM

This post has been deleted.

Amhran Nua · 09-01-2010 01:27PM

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

At the other end of the scale we have Song dynasty China, or even modern day China. Two extremes that result in similar ends. Therefore it is a misconception to say that one or the other is uniformly correct, and it is possible to conclude that success may be achieved by a combination of these methods.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

This government, which I am talking about, is a subset of all governments, which you are talking about.

donegalfella wrote: »

Sand is one of the most knowledgeable and valuable contributors to this forum. Telling him that he "might have been better served by watching telly" than posting here is an insult to him and to everyone who enjoys reading his perceptive and thoughtful posts.

Perhaps he should have thought of that before launching into a tirade about the poster rather than the post.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

And clearly you feel similar. I don't feel the need to address ad hominems except to point out their existence, and in this case to highlight that some people feel we are an easy target because we choose to try to make a difference. There are a large number of people who sit around complaining, there are very few who actually try to do something about it.

Meanwhile if you'd like to continue discussion on topic, that'd be just great.

Welease · 09-01-2010 01:33PM

Sand wrote: »

That the height of Irish economic policy can be summarised as getting foreign investment is a bit sad.

Are you even reading what people are people are posting?

Unless you are suggesting the "next big thing" for Ireland should be inward looking non exporting based business then you need to have foreign countries/companies/individuals investing in our technologies/processes/services/whatever.

If we are going to heavily invest and build a global centre of competence for green technologies for example, we need to be creating products the world will buy, not just taxing carbon and patting ourselves on the back saying job well done.

Permabear · 09-01-2010 02:23PM

This post has been deleted.

imme · 09-01-2010 02:47PM

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

(1) DF must you ascribe labels to everyone?

(2) DF you're a mod, are you taking sides?

(3) I think Sand can speak for himself, are you representing him. Again are you taking sides? I don't think insults should be traded on here, if they were.

(4) your reply to AN seems patronising and condescending if you don't mind me saying.

Permabear · 09-01-2010 02:59PM

This post has been deleted.

imme · 09-01-2010 03:08PM

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

ok you're a mod on other forums, apologies.
It came across as you speaking up for Sand, (not quite ganging up) as if AN had to be 'put in his place'.

(This is all a long way from the opening question I posed:rolleyes:, maybe that's politics:rolleyes:)

I didn't accuse you of insulting people but you're attitude cam come across as superior, condescending.

I've just looked back at the 'tele' quote by AN it seems ok to me, no malice intended I believe.

Daithinski · 09-01-2010 05:18PM

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Usually the only ones interested in stifling debate are those who wish the status quo to remain in place, to be honest.

No one is trying to stifle debate. This sounds like (posh) bertie-style waffle.:rolleyes:

I would love the status quo to change but I don't think amhran nua is the answer, thats all.

You suggested ship building... even though harlaand and wolf an established ship building company in a lower wage region than us couldn't make this work.

I was simply suggesting that maybe you are doing yourself more harm than good.

Though I suspect you undersood the point I was making but chose a true politician-style "make a straw man then knock it down" response. (eg. your stifle debate, status quo nonsense).

Maybe you could call your party "Amhran Out-of-tune".

Sand · 09-01-2010 06:16PM

@Amhran Nua
DF has already addressed a couple of your points so I'll just hit the highlights so I have more TV time.

Hardly. The state should provide incentive and direction, especially where little exists. If a business is unable to stand on its own merits thereafter, of course it should fail,

If a business (like say Irish shipbuilding) is unable to stand on its own merits, then it implies all the wealth poured into trying to provide that incentive and direction has been destroyed by misguided state policy. In those situations its not enough to go "Wooops, oh well!" and move on to the next castle in the sky.

Thats nice, but when the discussion becomes about the poster rather than the post, it usually means you haven't much else to support your position.

None of those comments were personal, they were about your party/agenda as reflected in your posts. Your philosophy of State>Citizen, where its apparently dogmatic libertarianism to claim the state should serve the citizen, is not immune to criticism because its your philosophy.

Libertarianism is corporate feudalism, the ultimate in social darwinism, and is therefore the quickest route to slavery you are likely to find.

Hello, I am not a libertarian though I am sympathetic to the philosophy. I am in favour of liberal democracy because it works, with the emphasis on liberal.

Was this not one of the justifications for the relaxing of regulation which lead directly to the current global economic collapse?

The invisible hand? No, the belief that financial markets were textbook perfect markets and where everyone had perfect information was mostly to blame. The invisible hand is derived from acceptance that people dont have perfect information.

Funnily enough, the state doesnt have perfect information either.

So you're holding up the failings of past governments as the reason why no future government could possibly ever succeed in providing direction to the economy. I see.

I never said government couldnt succeed in providing direction to the economy. I just dont accept your central idea that the state is always going to provide the right direction. The Irish government has very successfully provided direction to the economy over the past decade, successfully destroying immense quantities of wealth sucked into a construction bubble.

I dont give my taxes to the government to participate in a venture capital fund.

If the wingnuts on both ends of the political spectrum...

You think anyone who sees citizen>state is a wingnut...

you offset the failures with the success stories, since failures only happen once

What have you learned about the state incentivising particular industries from the recent construction industry?

This time, its going to be different - right?

These would be the same guys who thought we could all get rich buying and selling houses to each other forever?

Fianna Fail? You know it was state policy that encouraged that and made it rational to do the irrational?

Or to put it another way, how do you know your enterprise friendly environment (which would be a good thing) won't just get channelled into starting another property boom (which would be a bad thing). Or are you in fact in favour of disincentivising some industries after all?

So, youre saying we need to channel wealth into particular industries to stop wealth being channelled into particular industries?

Lets put it like this: If state policy hadnt incentivised the construction sector so heavily do you think as much wealth wouldnt have been thrown at it? You seem utterly convinced of the states economic power to achieve happy endings, but totally oblivious to the states economic power to achieve complete disaster.

I have more respect for the states ability to influence the market than you do it seems.

ardmacha · 09-01-2010 09:26PM

The idea of picking a winner and excelling at that is both difficult and dangerous. Quite simply if Ireland is to be among the top division of prosperous places in the world then it must have top standards in all of its activities. As we have seen recently second rate standards and government and finance have brought down many businesses and sectors who were otherwise doing a good job. A simple unwillingness to put up with second best is required. Talk of religion in schools etc is largely a side issue.

imme · 09-01-2010 09:35PM

ardmacha wrote: »

The idea of picking a winner (1) and excelling at that is both difficult and dangerous. Quite simply if Ireland is to be among the top division of prosperous places in the world then it must have top standards (2) in all of its activities. As we have seen recently second rate standards and government and finance have brought down many businesses and sectors who were otherwise doing a good job(3) . A simple unwillingness to put up with second best is required. Talk of religion in schools etc is largely a side issue.

(1) I opened the thread by asking 'What sector should Ireland Seek to Excel In?', I don't propose a speciality. It would be dangerous, possibly impossible for Ireland to be known for 1 discipline.

(2) I believe the educational standard in Ireland is first class, among the best.

(3) eh?, Anglo Irish Bank, INBS etc anyone. So, Irish business was fine because there was a bubble or where did the bubble come in?

wicklowmale · 09-01-2010 10:25PM

This country has huge resources on the west coast especially, for wind farms, wave turbines. It doesn't take a geneis to work that out.

We also have huge quantities of land been farmed very poorly. How many empty fields do we drive past each day either going to work or travelling around ireland. it is a discrace and farmers should be encouraged to use there land more effeciantly,

Pharmacuticals and Services is also something ireland can provide.

Unfortunately we are an island and to an extent we are limited to what we can provide.

Ireland is a beautifull country and tourism is one of our main services that we excel at.

Unfortunately the present system doesn't encourage ppl to get out working, you are nearly better off living of the state than working

The system needs to change big time but also more needs to be done with what we already have, farming, wind farms etc.

Amhran Nua · 10-01-2010 12:57PM

Daithinski wrote: »

No one is trying to stifle debate. This sounds like (posh) bertie-style waffle.:rolleyes:

I would love the status quo to change but I don't think amhran nua is the answer, thats all.

You suggested ship building... even though harlaand and wolf an established ship building company in a lower wage region than us couldn't make this work.

I was simply suggesting that maybe you are doing yourself more harm than good.

Though I suspect you undersood the point I was making but chose a true politician-style "make a straw man then knock it down" response. (eg. your stifle debate, status quo nonsense).

Maybe you could call your party "Amhran Out-of-tune".

Another one that thinks ad hominems are what all the smart, ballsy guys are doing these days.

I think maybe you want AH tbh, some of us are trying to have a discussion here, and interesting stuff it is.

Sand wrote: »

If a business (like say Irish shipbuilding) is unable to stand on its own merits, then it implies all the wealth poured into trying to provide that incentive and direction has been destroyed

Eh no, you have become too used to the property market I'm afraid. Something like shipbuilding uses a wide range of technologies from engines to materials to most of what an industrialised nation can produce. If the shipyards fail, you still have all that industrial infrastructure which is then turned to other purposes; this is why the industry was used by the likes of Korea, Japan and China to bootstrap their own infrastructure.

I wouldn't advocate a major national push towards it, but rather niche development and expansion.

Now this is the fourth time I've explained it to you, is there any way it can be made clearer.

Sand wrote: »

Your philosophy of State>Citizen

What philosophy is that? Where is that said or implied, except in the most roundabout circular fashion which could imply anything from anything, and therefore is not in fact an implication?

Sand wrote: »

Hello, I am not a libertarian though I am sympathetic to the philosophy. I am in favour of liberal democracy because it works, with the emphasis on liberal.

Liberal has about as much meaning as socialist these days. What exactly does it mean to you?

Sand wrote: »

The invisible hand? No, the belief that financial markets were textbook perfect markets and where everyone had perfect information was mostly to blame. The invisible hand is derived from acceptance that people dont have perfect information.

The invisible hand was meant to compensate for that failing. It didn't, so its not hard to imagine the gesture the invisible hand is making now. As for what was to blame, you can lay the blame squarely at the door of financial institutions lobbying to have regulation removed for decades, regulation that was put in place during the last depression to prevent andother great depression. Only took what, eight years to fall apart again.

Sand wrote: »

I never said government couldnt succeed in providing direction to the economy. I just dont accept your central idea that the state is always going to provide the right direction.

Again, where did you see that? The state can provide direction, and it can work out very well, or not. This is just putting words in my mouth at this stage.

Sand wrote: »

I dont give my taxes to the government to participate in a venture capital fund.

You're giving them to bail out failed companies right now.

Sand wrote: »

You think anyone who sees citizen>state is a wingnut...

Seriously, if strawmen are the best that can be done I think Corrie is on.

Sand wrote: »

What have you learned about the state incentivising particular industries from the recent construction industry?

And if your sample size remains one, thats all you will ever learn about the process.

Sand wrote: »

Fianna Fail? You know it was state policy that encouraged that and made it rational to do the irrational?

State policy that was originated by...

Sand wrote: »

So, youre saying we need to channel wealth into particular industries to stop wealth being channelled into particular industries?

If you don't want to respond to the question, yes or no, about whether we should disincentivise certain industries, thats up to yourself.

Daithinski · 10-01-2010 03:58PM

Amhran Nua wrote: »

some of us are trying to have a discussion here, and interesting stuff it is.

Interesting is one way of describing it. :eek:

Permabear · 10-01-2010 04:58PM

This post has been deleted.

What Should Ireland Seek To Excel In?

Comments