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

Bak to the grindstone

Options
  • 24-01-2007 9:18am
    #1
    Heinrich
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,577 ✭✭✭


    After a gruelling project of rehashing up failed schemes the boyz are back in the Dail!

    I hope the opposition will be less lenient on the latest "LONGEST ELECTION LEAFLET" in the history of the state.

    Tune in today at 14.30 for "a Fairytale in Leinster House". Entry free.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    €184 billion eh, knowing the way this shower run things it will end up costing us over €500 billion.

    The scarier thing is they have no backup plan if the economy hits a downturn.


  • Options
    #3
    Heinrich
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,577 ✭✭✭Heinrich


    gandalf wrote:
    €184 billion eh, knowing the way this shower run things it will end up costing us over €500 billion.

    The scarier thing is they have no backup plan if the economy hits a downturn.

    They don't believe that the economy will take a downturn. It is very difficult to see with your head in the sand, ask any self respecting ostritch!

    We already had a litle warning from the American Chamber of Commerce regarding our diminishing competitiveness due to inflation. Our economy relies on multinationals and the Fermoy disaster illustrates this.

    Unfortunately we will probably see the wasters back in in May.


  • Options
    #4
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    *Ahem* The 184 billion is for when the economy takes a downturn. When in periods of slack growth the best way to prime the economic pump is government spending on public projects. When times are good such spending can be hard to feed into the economy without creating inflation.

    As for the merits of the NDP if we had an Infrastucture forum we could start some good threads! ;)

    Mike.


  • Options
    #5
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,748 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    mike65 wrote:
    As for the merits of the NDP if we had an Infrastucture forum we could start some good threads! ;)

    The commuting and transport forum is a good place to discuss most of the infrastructure parts of the NDP. A lot of people there regularly discuss road projects, rail projects, etc.

    From an Infrastructure point of view the NDP plan is very good, but it doesn't include anything that hasn't already been announced under Transport21. On the positive side the NDP seems to suggest that the time tables for the T21 projects should be brought forward.

    It also mentions that we should be looking at an outer ring road (questionable IMO) and the eastern bypass (great idea IMO).


  • Options
    #6
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    mike65 wrote:
    *Ahem* The 184 billion is for when the economy takes a downturn. When in periods of slack growth the best way to prime the economic pump is government spending on public projects. When times are good such spending can be hard to feed into the economy without creating inflation.
    I sincerely doubt that's the way they're thinking Mike. It'd be something of a u-turn for the PDs and nu-FF to suddenly embrace Keynesian countercyclical fiscal policies. They sure as heck haven't followed the policy of raising taxes when there's excessive demand-side growth and their current view mirrors Hayek or Friedman far more than Keynes. A change like you've suggested would be something of an epiphany in my view but an apostasy in theirs.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    Yeah I know (FF economics are thoroughly McCreevyist at this stage), but thats how it should be done, instead they have tied themselves to a 7 year cycle for no good reason which threatens to be very inflationary if the economy ticks along at 4-6% for the next several years.

    Mike.


  • Options
    #8
    Tricity Bendix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,510 ✭✭✭Tricity Bendix


    sceptre wrote:
    I sincerely doubt that's the way they're thinking Mike. It'd be something of a u-turn for the PDs and nu-FF to suddenly embrace Keynesian countercyclical fiscal policies. They sure as heck haven't followed the policy of raising taxes when there's excessive demand-side growth and their current view mirrors Hayek or Friedman far more than Keynes. A change like you've suggested would be something of an epiphany in my view but an apostasy in theirs.
    A bit over-simplistic, tbh. For starters, what were the SSIAs but an attempt to influence demand? Secondly, it could very well be possible that the government isn't following a set of rules laid down by any one economist, but is rather acting pragmatically: We could never afford to cut taxes before, so it made sense to do so, whereas now we're experiencing capacity constraints so they're building a bunch of new roads n' stuff. I find it hard to believe that Cowen and Bertie discuss the General Theory over pints in the Dáil bar.
    bk wrote:
    It also mentions that we should be looking at an outer ring road (questionable IMO) and the eastern bypass (great idea IMO).
    The outer ring road will be essential if port activity continues to head North to Bremore. I don't understand how they'll build an eastern bypass without forever scarring the scenery of Dublin Bay.


Advertisement