Michael O'Leary's Theories

wylo

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

So we can function as a country.

star.chaser

P. Breathnach wrote: »

All that Michael O'Leary's bank balance tells us is that he is good a pursuing his own financial interests.

The question was "is he barking mad or a genius" People who are barking mad don't find themselves at the top of the most successful airline in the world. In the context of running an airline anyway he seems to be a bit of a genius. :cool:

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

P. Breathnach

star.chaser wrote: »

The question was "is he barking mad or a genius" People who are barking mad don't find themselves at the top of the most successful airline in the world. In the context of running an airline anyway he seems to be a bit of a genius. :cool:

Forgive me for quoting what I said earlier in this thread:

He is very talented in running the type of airline that I prefer not to use.

So obviously I agree with you that he has talent in one context. I am interpreting that as looking after his own financial interests. He is running Ryanair so as to make a profit, and rightly expects that he will make a lot of money for doing so. He does not do it as a hobby (he has horses and cows for that) and he does not do it as public service (that's not his job).

I cannot see how his hard-nosed business model could be translated into good government and public administration even though I can see a need for a more hard-nosed approach to some aspects of public service and public provision. I think O'Leary would agree with me on that: so far as I can remember, he has said that he is not interested in getting into that area.

Nearly everything he does in the public domain is for the benefit of Ryanair. The core of the piece cited by OP is a call for lowering taxes on "middle Ireland"; basically, he wants his potential customers to have more money. [It might have escaped his notice that if 30,000 people in the public service lost their jobs, then those 30,000 people are largely removed from the airline market.]

Spudmonkey

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I cannot see how his hard-nosed business model could be translated into good government and public administration even though I can see a need for a more hard-nosed approach to some aspects of public service and public provision. I think O'Leary would agree with me on that: so far as I can remember, he has said that he is not interested in getting into that area.

I don't think his ryanair approach would translate as a good government. It's more his dynamic qualities and ability and willingness to make tough choices thats needed. He has proved he has the ability to turn things around with a failing business. The government is nothing more only on a grander scale.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

P. Breathnach

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Not necessarily. It's not so long since people were suggesting that a thriving, prosperous Ireland and a thriving, prosperous construction industry go hand-in-hand.

O'Leary is hardly the first to suggest that the proper way to respond to a recession is to cut public spending and reduce taxes, rather than vice versa. Lower taxes give people more money to spend, which stimulates the economy and helps to create much-needed private-sector jobs. Raising taxes, as our government has chosen to do, has exactly the opposite effect: It hurts the private sector and makes people dependent on public-sector employment and state welfare, neither of which are sustainable long-term solutions.

Of course we need to cut public spending, but we simply don't have scope to reduce taxes because our highly-skewed tax base, heavily dependent on stamp duty and VRT, has failed us.

Stimulating domestic demand is a less efficacious measure in Ireland than in most economies because so much of what we produce depends on export markets and so much of what we consume is imported.

silverharp

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I cannot see how his hard-nosed business model could be translated into good government and public administration even though I can see a need for a more hard-nosed approach to some aspects of public service and public provision. I think O'Leary would agree with me on that: so far as I can remember, he has said that he is not interested in getting into that area.

Here is an example in the heath area which isnt arguing against your point. There is a consultant in Dublin who hires out a theatre at weekends, he brings in his own staff and carries out more operations at the weekend then he can do during the week. He has lost count of the amount of operations that have had to be cancelled because of poor logistics in hospitals for example porters on tea breaks or deciding to have an impromtu union meeting. There is simply little incentive to be efficient even in the front end, without even looking at the admin side. Can the current system adapt? I doubt it, its one artificial bottleneck after another

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

wylo

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

of course we cant, we could if the whole country was middle class but its not. Money has to be spent on lots of things in a country that are not purely to aid in a successful budget.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

wylo

dole,outreach projects, medical cards, better roads (are the working class not gonna be allowed drive on them because theyre not paying for them themselves??), cleaning , schools, hospitals. All of these things are needed for a country to run.

Honestly if you cant understand the basic principles behind why we pay tax I dont see the point in having this conversation.

P. Breathnach

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Things libertarians don't believe in. Let's not go there again.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

star.chaser

typical Irish attitude to knock people that do well. could never understand it myself

P. Breathnach

star.chaser wrote: »

typical Irish attitude to knock people that do well. could never understand it myself

There is very little knocking of Michael O'Leary in this thread.

It's just that some of us do not think he is wholly right about how we should deal with our economic problems. And some of us think, as I believe he himself does, that he would not be the ideal person to sort out our economy.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

P. Breathnach

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Okay. By a small party in opposition (where the PDs, when they existed, should have been kept).

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

P. Breathnach

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

What about Mary Harney?