Ireland to recover in 2010?

partyguinness

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0605/economy.html


Why do people say this crap without anything to back it up?

Is even the smallest bit of evidence to support this too much to ask for:mad:

nesf

Well to be fair, he didn't say Ireland would recover in 2010 but that it would start to recover and that the process would take many years.

It all falls down to the international situation really. If the US starts recovering next year then global demand should start picking up and that'll have a positive effect on our export sector. We will still have a painful internal correction to work out on our own with regard to our housing sector but it's possible for other areas of the economy to show some improvement before this happens.

ionix5891

ill believe it when i see it

Martyr

i would have expected the situation to worsen next year for some people, especially those out of work and a mortgage to pay..

mal1

Maybe i'm a bit naive but surely he has some evidence to back up what he is saying. Maybe it wasn't reported in this article or the evidence is from an internal report. I doubt a man in his position would say stuff willy-nilly.

is_that_so

partyguinness wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0605/economy.html


Why do people say this crap without anything to back it up?

Is even the smallest bit of evidence to support this too much to ask for:mad:

Indeed as Governor of the Central Bank he hasn't a clue. The idea of improvement makes some sense, it's just the timing of it that is not altogether clear. I don't see that it's unreasonable to suppose the economy will stop contracting. Even 0.1% is a "recovery".

partyguinness

is_that_so wrote: »

Indeed as Governor of the Central Bank he hasn't a clue.

Well the banking fiasco over the last 9 mts would certainly back that up....

20goto10

What does "recovery" mean? Seriously I'm not being smart, I always wonder if there is a definition for recovery and if they're all talking about the same thing.

paddy111199

I just think that developers are estate agents to get Fecking real over the asking prices of houses. Semi D in Kildare for over 500k!!!! They are still having a laugh. Absoloutely no symaphy for them along with the recruitement companies!

Dont get me wrong I want Ireland to become more competitive but people making "easy" money for the last 10 years need to wake up and smell the Sh*te!!

Anyway that is my wee rant over with.

partyguinness

20goto10 wrote: »

What does "recovery" mean? Seriously I'm not being smart, I always wonder if there is a definition for recovery and if they're all talking about the same thing.

TBH I dont think anyone in this country knows what a recovery means..The last 10-15 boom yrs revolved around the construction/housing sector. That will never happen again or at least will be no where near those ridic levels so this "recovery" will have to based on something else entirely and I have no clue as to what this will be.

Any suggestions anyone?

is_that_so

partyguinness wrote: »

Well the banking fiasco over the last 9 mts would certainly back that up....

Again he's the wrong man to look at. Direct responsibility was with the Financial Regulator. There's also a big difference between light regulation and not knowing anything. He did "warn" banks a good number of times. It still doesn't mean he doesn't know what he is talking about in relation to other areas.

20goto10

partyguinness wrote: »

TBH I dont think anyone in this country knows what a recovery means..The last 10-15 boom yrs revolved around the construction/housing sector. That will never happen again or at least will be no where near those ridic levels so this "recovery" will have to based on something else entirely and I have no clue as to what this will be.

Any suggestions anyone?

But surely recovery does not mean back to the heights of the boom? That would require another boom to achieve.

20goto10

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0605/breaking36.htm

The Irish times report on Krugman but don't mention John Hurley. Interesting bit at the end:

Mr Krugman forecast that it will be five years before Ireland's economic growth matches that of the rest of the euro zone.

Spudmonkey

partyguinness wrote: »

Why do people say this crap without anything to back it up?

Local Elections!

Niall Keane

If by “recovery” this also entails the construction sector, well let’s examine this.
Previously, persons with a then considered viable plan could present such to a bank for finance.
How long can we expect a medium sized development capable of creating employment to take? The kind of development that once successfully completed would encourage banks to invest back into the sector, allowing a recovery? I’m going to be generous (optimistic) but realistic with my figures:
1. Someone (with capital) needs to see an opportunity; they then perhaps need to acquire the relevant land – 1 year?
2. Now they need to hire a design team and go through the planning process – once upon a time An Bord Pleanala had 18 weeks to make a decision now it has no limit, hence the ransoming by certain communities when any development is proposed. (They offer to withdraw an appeal for cash.) Planning say (if no re-zoning, material contravention is required) so say at best 2.5 years. (8 weeks for local authority who will then ask for further information + 6months, then after 4 weeks appeal time, +2 years in the Bord.)
3. 6 months Fire Cert/ Tender or Construction Drawings / Specification preparation
4. 2 year build (probably a lot more now, as everything will be phased testing the market with small parcels each time)
5. Let’s pretend it will be an immediate sale
So be optimistic, and say as I’ve shown above - 6 years from the moment a developer with cash sees an opportunity to when they profit on it. That’s 6 years before the banks “can’t refuse” to invest.
So my guess – 6-10 years for construction industry recovery.

P. Breathnach

nesf wrote: »

Well to be fair...

It seems to me as if any contribution that starts out with such an aspiration is likely to be given short shrift here.

Do we need a sub-forum from fact-free and evidence-unencumbered rants?

nesf

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It seems to me as if any contribution that starts out with such an aspiration is likely to be given short shrift here.

All one can do is try I'm afraid.

Yes we will recover next year, as long as your consider 17% unemployment an improvement......
http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0605/liveregister.html

Dr Galen

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It seems to me as if any contribution that starts out with such an aspiration is likely to be given short shrift here.

Do we need a sub-forum from fact-free and evidence-unencumbered rants?

i think the defintion of recovery for someone like the Governor of the Central Bank, a regular poster on this forum, and the normal "man on the street" are going to be 3 different things.

i'd be in agreement that the US economy will be the key factor in when we can look to see an upturn. As has been commented on before, our open nature economically will mean that any worldwide/US led recovery will have a positive effect here. Unfortunately, as we may have borrowed ourselves into a black hole and taxed to the hilt, such positive effects may only have limited short term impact. Of course, eventually we'll get out of it, and I'd imagine the idea that we're looking at a long hard slog, is pretty on the money

Hamsey

20goto10 wrote: »

What does "recovery" mean? Seriously I'm not being smart, I always wonder if there is a definition for recovery and if they're all talking about the same thing.

They are just talking. they think they can talk their way out of recession. they are wrong.

Capitalism does not have, within itself, a self correcting mechanism. In times of financial collapse the recovery period has been as long as 10 years for major economies and in some cases smaller capitalist economies have simply gone into an apparently endless downward spiral. And, where there has been recovery, it has not been due to the capitalist system, but rather due to government intervention with either socialist measures or central control and direction of the economy, more often than not as part of a war effort and large scale military spending.

During economic upturns capitalism does generally result in good levels of pay and employment, but even then only part of the profit goes to the people who do the work, while huge carefully hidden profits are siphoned off to company head offices.

Sometimes in third world or low pay countries capitalism brings prosperity to local economies. What happens is that entrepreneurs realise that they can manufacture the goods they sell more cheaply abroad than they can produce them at home. And if a country has a suitable business environment for the overseas investors – low crime figures, low taxation, compliant government and reasonable infrastructure – then they pour in development money. Of course, the new factories that are built, are really just replacing the old factories that have been closed in the entrepreneurs’ home countries. But for a time all goes well in the new country. Until the capitalists spot another country offering a better deal and and yet again lower pay.

When capitalism goes wrong the result is mass unemployment and falling rates of pay, along with high taxes and lost benefits for ordinary people. This routine collapse is, in fact, an absurd situation. There are still the same skilled and professional workers available as before. The same farmlands and the same raw materials are still there. The only reason for the collapse is the malfunction of the system. All that is needed to restore prosperity is a determination to take control and run the economy in the public interest.

Mick Shrimpton

Is that you, God?

Hasschu

If unemployment stabilizes at 17% and jobs created are at least equeal to jobs lost on a month to month basis then the recovery will have begun as far as the main stream media is concerned. This could happen in the last half of 2010. However the unemployment rate would still be 17% and could increase slightly as new entrants to the labour market would not be able to find jobs until the well experienced unemployed were sopped up. We are headed for a tough five or six years which will hit young people the hardest and also the over fifties unemployed who may never work again. A government with sound economic and social support policies can mitigate the damage by playing ball with the ECB and being honest with all of us about what has to be done. The pain has to be spread out evenly and fairly if we are to have a hope of escaping third world status.

zootroid

From RTE:

Irish recovery, 'but not until 2011'

A report from Goodbody Stockbrokers has predicted that while Ireland's economic recovery will lag behind those of other countries, the economy is likely to grow in 2011.

But it warns that the effects of the recession, particularly on unemployment, will linger, and Ireland must come up with new policies to preserve jobs.

Goodbody's latest forecast says the economy will shrink by 8.7% this year and another 4.6% in 2010. But it expects 1% growth in 2011. The report says an Irish recovery is dependent on an improvement in the world economy. It says there are signs that the rate of decline in the global economy is slowing, and that there will be 'modest' world growth next year.

Goodbody economist Dermot O'Leary believes the Irish economy will look very different from that of two or three years ago, with exports accounting for an increasing share of output.

He believes the unemployment rate will peak at 17.5% in 2011, and expresses concern about what happened in a similar situation in Finland in the early 1990s. 'Worryingly, when employment fell by this extent in Finland in the early 1990s, it took 18 years for it to return to its pre-recession level,' Mr O'Leary says.

The economist expects a 4% fall in consumer prices this year. On the public finances, his report says that while the April Budget 'started the ball rolling' in addressing the problem, but the process would take a number of years to complete.

Mr O'Leary said the lack of detail on NAMA was creating uncertainty among international investors about the cost to the State of fixing the banking system. 'Time is of the essence,' he adds.

http://www.rte.ie/business/2009/0610/economy.html

So essentially, while the global economy recovers next year, it will still take longer for Ireland to recover. And while jobs are still being lost during that time, and unemployment expected to reach 17%, it will take years for the country to approach anywhere near full employment. Now everyone knows that economic forecasts are pretty useless beyond 5 years as its just too difficult to predict what will happen in that space of time. But if the Finnish example were to replicate in Ireland, then it is truly frightening for the country. A generation lost almost. How anyone could vote FF again after this is beyond me.

johnnyskeleton

nesf wrote: »

Well to be fair, he didn't say Ireland would recover in 2010 but that it would start to recover and that the process would take many years.

Can the recovery not start today? I mean you could say that today is the first day of the recovery, we will still have to undergo some more pain, but today is the turnaround day. Who can really argue? I guess the idea of a recovery is so vague as to have no real meaning.

Also, the government have promised to get the deficit back on track by 2013 or thereabouts. This means that every time the deficit gets worse now, they have to scale back the date for this recovery or turnaround so that we have a plan to point to for getting back to proper government finances by 2013. I think the "recovery" was originally forecast for 2011 but because things have gotten so bad, the government have had to magically predict it to happen a year sooner and at a greater pace of economic growth. It's all makey up stuff, that can be plausibly denied in a few years.

nesf

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I guess the idea of a recovery is so vague as to have no real meaning.

Yup, it's pretty meaningless without specific and detailed definition of what exactly recovery entails for a person. Personally I'd consider positive or near-zero GDP growth but there's a whole bunch of different ways of looking at it (reversal in unemployment figures is another, or even them "bottoming out"). More importantly, any prediction of recovery even with detail that isn't accompanied by a detailed set of reasons for said recovery is meaningless. Similar to how people making vague assertions about the bubble bursting in X year were meaningless a few years back.

johnnyskeleton

nesf wrote: »

Yup, it's pretty meaningless without specific and detailed definition of what exactly recovery entails for a person. Personally I'd consider positive or near-zero GDP growth but there's a whole bunch of different ways of looking at it (reversal in unemployment figures is another, or even them "bottoming out"). More importantly, any prediction of recovery even with detail that isn't accompanied by a detailed set of reasons for said recovery is meaningless. Similar to how people making vague assertions about the bubble bursting in X year were meaningless a few years back.

Well to be fair , he did mention international factors.

SkepticOne

I think most people would see the recovery starting around the time last year when the government started making the hard and often unpopular choices for the good of the country.

silverharp

SkepticOne wrote: »

I think most people would see the recovery starting around the time last year when the government started making the hard and often unpopular choices for the good of the country.

attempting to balance the budget would be an unpopular decision that would be good for the country , running up 10's of K debt on top of my kids heads and spending like drunken sailors (no offense to drunken sailors) is unpopular because people know its going to end badly. The gov seem to want to rerun the 70's and 80s where they will borrow until people stop lending them money

SkepticOne

Meanwhile, it looks like the worst of the recession in Britain is over according to the NIESR there.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8092780.stm

Their independent currency allows them to take the hit quickly through devaluation, an option we don't have.