What chance of a General Election in 2010 ?

freewheeler

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Careful!!! You'll have Bertie Ahern coming on here wondering why you don't.....y'know......that thing that he reckons all realists should do ?

LOL true Liam..just never ceases to amaze me that some folks still trust this shower...how many more strokes have to be pulled before they see the light?

hallelujajordan

Het-Field wrote: »

1.It was Ireland For Europe which led by Pat Cox, Brendan Halligan and Garrett Fitzgerald carried the referendum. They were the most prominant face, and encompassed the vast majority of non-affiliated people. Occasional appearences from Martin doesnt negate the fact that FF's role in the passage of the Lisbon Treaty was negligible at best. "His strategy worked". BIFFO has no strategy.

We could argue this forever. Sometimes, in business simply doing nothing is a sensible strategy. The reality is the government had to deliver Lisbon in 2009, they did and for this I credit them even if you don't

het-field wrote:

2. I would encourage you to wait until we see full figures for 2010 emmigration. Commentators predict anything up to 40,000 people could leave this jurisdiction. The reduction was also viewed in the light of average removals of those disentitled to sit on the live register, those who entered training schemes (not necessairly beneficial ones).Largescale entry to FAS has also skewed the figures vis-avis unemployment. I omitted to mention that. THese people are in training. They are no longer on the "live register", however, they are still, for all intents and purposes unemployed. The reduction is NOT a sign of a return to competitiveness (which FF lost incrementally as Bertie licked the arses of the Unions), or a return to growth in sustainable employment. Emigration, disentitlement, and governmental training schemes have all contributed. As I have said, given Ireland's blunt edge vis-a-vis competitiveness a return to largescale employment is some time away.

I know there are other factors but the numbers are quite significant here and I truly believe demonstrate a stabilisation in the rate of unemployed. I think the anecdotal evidence also supports my analysis. . During the last quarter of 2009 there was notably less news reports of large scale redundancies.

het-field wrote:

3.International recoveries at a faster rate are NOT good for Ireland. Mr Trichet is gagging to increase interest rates, and that is guaranteed to happen before the Autumn is out. As I have mentioned, irish wages are too high, the cost of electricity and land rents (not so much anymore) is too high, and Cowen has ignored any chance of cutting corporation tax to curry favour with our international partners.

We are the 34th largest exporter in the world (impressive given our size) and our export market is worth somewhere in the region of $120Bn annually. How can an improvement in buying power within our export markets and an increase in our exports be a bad thing ?

hallelujajordan

Het-Field wrote: »

Well the CSO have also mentioned that the standardised Unemployment rate is 12.5%. That doesnt exactly articulate much room to spin anything in a good light. Who is responsible for creating the conditions which created this rate ?

Yes, but my point is that in January of last year that rate was 9.4%, In August, it was 12.6% but since then it has dropped month on month. . this indicates a stabilisation in my book !

Who is responsible . . ? We all are . . the government, elected by the people over the previous decade or so delivered consistently on their manifesto and on three seperate occasions renewed their mandate to lower income taxes and increase the wealth and spending power of the people in Ireland so that we could all drive bigger, newer cars or live in bigger houses. *We all bought into it . . sure only a couple of years ago, The Economist was reporting that Irish people had the highest standards of living in the world. . . *We created the bubble, *we lived in the bubble, *we enjoyed the fruits of the bubble and then it burst.

Oh, yeah, there was also a major global financial crisis which might have had some impact on the situation !

*Note (WE denotes the collective populace of Ireland but specifically excludes Liam Byrne)

Het-Field

hallelujajordan wrote: »

We could argue this forever. Sometimes, in business simply doing nothing is a sensible strategy. The reality is the government had to deliver Lisbon in 2009, they did and for this I credit them even if you don't



I know there are other factors but the numbers are quite significant here and I truly believe demonstrate a stabilisation in the rate of unemployed. I think the anecdotal evidence also supports my analysis. . During the last quarter of 2009 there was notably less news reports of large scale redundancies.



We are the 34th largest exporter in the world (impressive given our size) and our export market is worth somewhere in the region of $120Bn annually. How can an improvement in buying power within our export markets and an increase in our exports be a bad thing ?

Our power as an export economy has been based on FDI, and large international companies. We dont have an indigenous economy to feed into that. Conditions need to be right to continue to proffer ourselves as an export economy. 2009 Has highlighted that internationally we are no longer deemed to be competitive, and other countries, which have not fallen pray to 10% increases in public expenditure per annum since 2004, and an FF inflated property bubble.

"Significant figures" are irrelevant until you can classify them. As I have mentioned people come on and off the live register for countless reasons. I have mentioned some of these reasons. The vast majority of those off the register have not re-entered the workforce in a sustainable manner. They may have been working short term, which will come to an end after Christmas, they may have left the country for a definate period, or they may have emigrated. Equally things like the BETA have encouraged people to return to education, which disentitles social welfare payments. I will hold my breath until the year is out when emigration has settled down, our competitive position has become clearer, and we see a sustained period of growth/reduction in unemployment. As such, you are popping your cork a little too early.

Het-Field

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Yes, but my point is that in January of last year that rate was 9.4%, In August, it was 12.6% but since then it has dropped month on month. . this indicates a stabilisation in my book !

Who is responsible . . ? We all are . . the government, elected by the people over the previous decade or so delivered consistently on their manifesto and on three seperate occasions renewed their mandate to lower income taxes and increase the wealth and spending power of the people in Ireland so that we could all drive bigger, newer cars or live in bigger houses. *We all bought into it . . sure only a couple of years ago, The Economist was reporting that Irish people had the highest standards of living in the world. . . *We created the bubble, *we lived in the bubble, *we enjoyed the fruits of the bubble and then it burst.

Oh, yeah, there was also a major global financial crisis which might have had some impact on the situation !

*Note (WE denotes the collective populace of Ireland but specifically excludes Liam Byrne)

A true FFer response. For God's sake take responsibility for the wanton waste on the p par system, the HSE, the Luas, the Port Tunnel, Benchmarking II. Not all people enjoyed the bubble. Only some people who were incapable of thinking for themselves. The banks played a large role as they encouraged unsustainable mortgages on those who were clearly incapable of handling them Bertie gladly turned a blind eye to that.

The OECD and IMF reports highlight that Ireland's economy was one of the most over-heated in Europe. It was the property bubble and the wanton spending which brought us to that position. The Government didnt have to bow down to populist demands of people who are only interested in improving their own scenario. They did.

I voted FF in 2007, and I have dealt with FF in the past. However, I just cannot stand over a generally honourable party, who were ruined by some of the bad apples which made up it's front bench. I want to see FF become the party that Lemass wanted it to be. It is so far removed from that ideal under Cowen that it is not worth debating, and it truly upsets me.

kev9100

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Yes, but my point is that in January of last year that rate was 9.4%, In August, it was 12.6% but since then it has dropped month on month. . this indicates a stabilisation in my book !



Oh, yeah, there was also a major global financial crisis which might have had some impact on the situation !

You may want to study your figures again. The figures have not dropped month by month. It was 12.6% in August and in November it was 12.5%. Unless September and October have been abolished you may want to change your post. And yes, we all know there was a major financial crisis but the fact remains Ireland has suffered far worse in this recession then almost any other Eurozone country because of the disastrous policies of our dear leaders FF. And you still support them? Wake up and smell the coffee.

ninty9er

Het-Field wrote: »

A true FFer response. For God's sake take responsibility for the wanton waste on the p par system, the HSE, the Luas, the Port Tunnel, Benchmarking II. Not all people enjoyed the bubble. Only some people who were incapable of thinking for themselves. The banks played a large role as they encouraged unsustainable mortgages on those who were clearly incapable of handling them Bertie gladly turned a blind eye to that.

The port tunnell is serving its purpose in keeping trucks out of the city, 45% of PPARS like projects fail, regardless of whther they are public or private sector, that figure might be higher, but I remember an IT lecturer telling us that, the HSE I'll agree on, The Luas was a great investment, benchmarking Irish style = complete joke.

I'm not saying that the boom didn't have its flaws, but most people who saw moderate increases in living standards retain them today, those who went mad are probably worse off today. That is not any government's fault.

Taxipete29

hallelujajordan wrote: »

We could argue this forever. Sometimes, in business simply doing nothing is a sensible strategy. The reality is the government had to deliver Lisbon in 2009, they did and for this I credit them even if you don't



I know there are other factors but the numbers are quite significant here and I truly believe demonstrate a stabilisation in the rate of unemployed. I think the anecdotal evidence also supports my analysis. . During the last quarter of 2009 there was notably less news reports of large scale redundancies.



We are the 34th largest exporter in the world (impressive given our size) and our export market is worth somewhere in the region of $120Bn annually. How can an improvement in buying power within our export markets and an increase in our exports be a bad thing ?

Less reports of large scale redundancies does not mean less redundancies. Most lay-offs are smaller groups in smaller firms that dont get reported in the media.

It doesnt matter if people leaving the country are Irish, Polish or otherwise. The fact that they have lost their jobs and are leaving means that the figures quoted are not showing the full picture.

You really seem to be failing to grasp the economic reality of the well predicted and inevitable interest rate increase. It will be a disaster for Ireland considering our high levels of personal debt.

Spiritoftheseventies

Yes some posters seem to think that FF are over the worst of it. But they have taken no action against the rogue bankers. They continue to punish the weaker sections of society. Granted they showed a bit of backbone against the Public sector towards end of last year but how much really. No I think public are just riding this one out and then come the next election FF will face their day of reckoning.

hallelujajordan

Het-Field wrote: »

Our power as an export economy has been based on FDI, and large international companies. We dont have an indigenous economy to feed into that. Conditions need to be right to continue to proffer ourselves as an export economy. 2009 Has highlighted that internationally we are no longer deemed to be competitive, and other countries, which have not fallen pray to 10% increases in public expenditure per annum since 2004, and an FF inflated property bubble.

Indeed, but if those large international companies are selling more product into a global market then, at least in the short term that has to spell good news for their employees in Ireland. I entirely agree with you that we need to return to a stronger level of competitiveness and I am not for one second saying "Economy is fixed, lets move on now" . . I'm merely pointing to the fact that we are beginning to show signs of recovery.

Het-field wrote:

"Significant figures" are irrelevant until you can classify them. As I have mentioned people come on and off the live register for countless reasons. I have mentioned some of these reasons. The vast majority of those off the register have not re-entered the workforce in a sustainable manner. They may have been working short term, which will come to an end after Christmas, they may have left the country for a definate period, or they may have emigrated. Equally things like the BETA have encouraged people to return to education, which disentitles social welfare payments. I will hold my breath until the year is out when emigration has settled down, our competitive position has become clearer, and we see a sustained period of growth/reduction in unemployment. As such, you are popping your cork a little too early.

Not popping my cork and as mentioned earlier, I am not arguing that our employment situation is fixed and we can move forward and forget about this crisis. Simply pointing out a stabilisation in the numbers which has to be a positive sign, even if there are other compounding factors.

het-field wrote:

A true FFer response. For God's sake take responsibility for the wanton waste on the p par system, the HSE, the Luas, the Port Tunnel, Benchmarking II. Not all people enjoyed the bubble. Only some people who were incapable of thinking for themselves. The banks played a large role as they encouraged unsustainable mortgages on those who were clearly incapable of handling them Bertie gladly turned a blind eye to that.

While I disagree with most of your examples, I totally accept that there is waste in the system. In my mind, taking responsibility for this is about standing up and trying to fix the problems that exist. That is what I believe the Cowen government is currently doing.

het-field wrote:

The OECD and IMF reports highlight that Ireland's economy was one of the most over-heated in Europe. It was the property bubble and the wanton spending which brought us to that position. The Government didnt have to bow down to populist demands of people who are only interested in improving their own scenario. They did.

The government act on their manifesto and on the mandate provided to them by the demands of the people. In the case of Ireland we (not all of us LB) were demanding lower taxes and bigger properties. Thats democracy and if they don't do it we will promptly replace them at the next opportunity with a government that will

het-field wrote:

I voted FF in 2007, and I have dealt with FF in the past. However, I just cannot stand over a generally honourable party, who were ruined by some of the bad apples which made up it's front bench. I want to see FF become the party that Lemass wanted it to be. It is so far removed from that ideal under Cowen that it is not worth debating, and it truly upsets me

I don't understand your constant contradictions. The foundations for almost everything you criticise them for were in place before you voted for them in 2007, yet you still voted for them and you now blame a Cowen goverment who have been working to reverse some of these policies.

taxipete29 wrote:

Less reports of large scale redundancies does not mean less redundancies. Most lay-offs are smaller groups in smaller firms that dont get reported in the media.

Agreed, but i present it only as anecdotal evidence that supports the actual evidence and i think it is as good as the anecdotal evidence that says that emigration is distorting the unemployment numbers'

taxipete29 wrote:

It doesnt matter if people leaving the country are Irish, Polish or otherwise. The fact that they have lost their jobs and are leaving means that the figures quoted are not showing the full picture.

Well, I did a small analysis to try to demonstrate what the impact of this emigration was having on the bigger picture. . And I mentioned their nationalities becaus I think it is important. There is a difference between a brain drain (believe me, I know what this is. . left Ireland with a graduate degree for 5 years in the early 90's because I couldn't get a job) and Eastern Europeans returning home because their jobs in a shrinking construction sector have disappeared.

taxipete29 wrote:

You really seem to be failing to grasp the economic reality of the well predicted and inevitable interest rate increase. It will be a disaster for Ireland considering our high levels of personal debt.

I think you are overstating it. . I think there will be modest increases in interest rates this year (probably very late in the year) and I don't think it will be trigger a 'national disaster'

Taxipete29

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I think you are overstating it. . I think there will be modest increases in interest rates this year (probably very late in the year) and I don't think it will be trigger a 'national disaster'

So what exactly do you think the effect of higher interest rates will be??

hallelujajordan

Taxipete29 wrote: »

So what exactly do you think the effect of higher interest rates will be??

I think it will take money out of peoples pockets, reduce our spending power a little (some of which, btw will be offset by deflation). I'm not looking forward to it but just like the public sector pay cuts did not harpoon half the public sector below the poverty line as they would have had you believe, this will not be a 'national disaster' . .

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I think it will take money out of peoples pockets, reduce our spending power a little (some of which, btw will be offset by deflation). I'm not looking forward to it but just like the public sector pay cuts did not harpoon half the public sector below the poverty line as they would have had you believe, this will not be a 'national disaster' . .

Spoken like someone who's not on a low or minimum wage, anyway!

Go visit the real world, where people currently have about €100 a month after all taxes and outgoings, and have to still manage house insurance, car tax, etc, once a year, and haven't a hope of changing a seven or eight year old car.

And before you come back with some smug "that's their own fault for taking out a big mortgage / big loan for a fancy car" - it's not.

Of course, if the TDs actually bit the bullet and stopped wasting our cash on ridiculous OTT expenses and perks for themselves, then we might actually be able to stomach it.

But while those prats are insulated from most of the day-to-day expenses of this country, we'll get the above bull**** from all FF faithful; a sure, it's only a few quid here and there.

It all adds up, and while yes, deflation has softened the blow, the fact that utility prices and loan repayments haven't "deflated" - and insurance has gone up massively, as a direct result of the lack of regulation and of budget impacts - means that it's not a "saving 7% across the board" scenario.

Taxipete29

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I think it will take money out of peoples pockets, reduce our spending power a little (some of which, btw will be offset by deflation). I'm not looking forward to it but just like the public sector pay cuts did not harpoon half the public sector below the poverty line as they would have had you believe, this will not be a 'national disaster' . .

Reduced spending power means even less money spent and will result in no growth in the near future. No growth means no jobs and no way to get 500k people off the dole queues and back into employment. While it wont be the end of the world you really are underestimating the effects that interest rates have on our economy as a whole.

hallelujajordan

Taxipete29 wrote: »

Reduced spending power means even less money spent and will result in no growth in the near future. No growth means no jobs and no way to get 500k people off the dole queues and back into employment. While it wont be the end of the world you really are underestimating the effects that interest rates have on our economy as a whole.

How can you see it so black and white. . Surely it depends on the size of the interest rate increases combined with the deflation effect over the same period and growth/changes in the economy between now and then . . You act like the market can bear no interest rate increases at all which I don't agree with . .

I would rephrase your statement as follows and agree with it. .

Reduced spending power means even less money spent and will result in less growth in the near future. Less growth means less jobs and a greater challenge to get 500k people off the dole queues and back into employment

BTW, you are overestimating the dole queue by somewhere between 15 and 20% . . further, its ridiculous to assume that we can get to a level of 0% unemployment. . The challenge is less than half of what you estimate it to be. .

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Spoken like someone who's not on a low or minimum wage, anyway!

Go visit the real world, where people currently have about €100 a month after all taxes and outgoings, and have to still manage house insurance, car tax, etc, once a year, and haven't a hope of changing a seven or eight year old car.

And before you come back with some smug "that's their own fault for taking out a big mortgage / big loan for a fancy car" - it's not.

You have no idea what I do, what I earn, what kind of house I live in, car I drive or world I live in - your comments are ridiculous, personal and unneccessary.

Liam Byrne wrote:

Of course, if the TDs actually bit the bullet and stopped wasting our cash on ridiculous OTT expenses and perks for themselves, then we might actually be able to stomach it.

To be fair, TD's have taken a greater hit on their take home pay in 2009 than any of the rest of us, either in the public or private sector. Agree the expenses system needs overhaul and I think this will happen but its disingenuous to suggest they are not taking a hit.

Liam Byrne wrote:

But while those prats are insulated from most of the day-to-day expenses of this country, we'll get the above bull**** from all FF faithful; a sure, it's only a few quid here and there.

You've never gotten that bull**** from me !

Liam Byrne wrote:

It all adds up, and while yes, deflation has softened the blow, the fact that utility prices and loan repayments haven't "deflated" - and insurance has gone up massively, as a direct result of the lack of regulation and of budget impacts - means that it's not a "saving 7% across the board" scenario.

Agreed. . and look, I don't want to see interest rate increases this year. . All I'm saying (and I think it is a fair point) is that modest interest rate increases will not cripple the country and reverse the current positive swing.

ninty9er

bayviewclose wrote: »

But they have taken no action against the rogue bankers. They continue to punish the weaker sections of society.

What action, there is no basis for action against most of them as they have done nothing illegal. Doing something wrong is very different from doing something illegal. Who exactly is being punished. I saw no punishment. Punishment is something imposed for wrongdoing. I was reductions across almost all sectors in the budget, this is NOT punishment. Get real. there's a €24bn deficit, do you propose we all become toothless and hope the tooth-fairy will fix it?

Taxipete29 wrote: »

So what exactly do you think the effect of higher interest rates will be??

Nothing. The only people this will affect, should it transpire, are those who have taken loans at the current rate, everyone else has been able to manage higher interest rates before. The argument of unemployment since then is null as default would have been inevitible regardless of change if a small interest movement is going to cause it.

Taxipete29

hallelujajordan wrote: »

How can you see it so black and white. . Surely it depends on the size of the interest rate increases combined with the deflation effect over the same period and growth/changes in the economy between now and then . . You act like the market can bear no interest rate increases at all which I don't agree with . .

I would rephrase your statement as follows and agree with it. .

Reduced spending power means even less money spent and will result in less growth in the near future. Less growth means less jobs and a greater challenge to get 500k people off the dole queues and back into employment

BTW, you are overestimating the dole queue by somewhere between 15 and 20% . . further, its ridiculous to assume that we can get to a level of 0% unemployment. . The challenge is less than half of what you estimate it to be. .

I know we cant get to 0% unemployment. Full employment is considered to be around 3-5%. I know and understand this. I have yet to meet anyone who would say we only have worry about half the people on the dole as the ohter half are supposed to be unemployed. You were trying to be a smart ass and you failed miserably.

If your just going to be pedantic about the whole thing I am not going to bother trying to talk to you.

hallelujajordan

Taxipete29 wrote: »

I know we cant get to 0% unemployment. Full employment is considered to be around 3-5%. I know and understand this. I have yet to meet anyone who would say we only have worry about half the people on the dole as the ohter half are supposed to be unemployed. You were trying to be a smart ass and you failed miserably.

If your just going to be pedantic about the whole thing I am not going to bother trying to talk to you.

I'm genuinely not trying to be a smart-ass. . the problem is big enough without you overestimating it and if we can get back to early 2008 employment levels over the next two years I will certainly be happy . . the challenge to get there is roughly half what you estimate with your 500k . .. not a pedantic number at all ..

Taxipete29

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I'm genuinely not trying to be a smart-ass. . the problem is big enough without you overestimating it and if we can get back to early 2008 employment levels over the next two years I will certainly be happy . . the challenge to get there is roughly half what you estimate with your 500k . .. not a pedantic number at all ..

I do know the figure is closer to 400k than 500k.

hallelujajordan

Taxipete29 wrote: »

I do know the figure is closer to 400k than 500k.

But yet you exaggerate what is already a fairly bleak number ? ? Just like you exaggerate the impact of what is likely to be a fairly modest interest rate increase this year. . .

I know the discussion sounds pedantic but its important that we have a real world conversation and recognise progress where it is happening. . . I have been accused on here of popping my cork and ignoring the problems, but I'm not . . I'm merely trying to apply a reality check and recognise that although we have a long way to go, we are making progress. Its because of this progress that there will not be a General Election in 2010 (Back on Topic )

Taxipete29

hallelujajordan wrote: »

But yet you exaggerate what is already a fairly bleak number ? ? Just like you exaggerate the impact of what is likely to be a fairly modest interest rate increase this year. . .

I know the discussion sounds pedantic but its important that we have a real world conversation and recognise progress where it is happening. . . I have been accused on here of popping my cork and ignoring the problems, but I'm not . . I'm merely trying to apply a reality check and recognise that although we have a long way to go, we are making progress. Its because of this progress that there will not be a General Election in 2010 (Back on Topic )

Ok, moving back on-topic. I cant see an election either. It wont be becasue of progress however. People want FF and the Greens out. They want them out now. Any support you think FF have picked up pales in comparison to the hatred there is for them around the country. If I was a Govt TD I wouldnt want an election either knowing there was a good chance I would be out of a job after it.

The Govt have been flying in the face of public opinion since last June. While they recieved a mandate in 2007, it was not a mandate to govern during the worst economic crisis we have ever seen. Thats why I feel there should be an election.

hallelujajordan

Taxipete29 wrote: »

Ok, moving back on-topic. I cant see an election either. It wont be becasue of progress however. People want FF and the Greens out. They want them out now. Any support you think FF have picked up pales in comparison to the hatred there is for them around the country. If I was a Govt TD I wouldnt want an election either knowing there was a good chance I would be out of a job after it.

The Govt have been flying in the face of public opinion since last June. While they recieved a mandate in 2007, it was not a mandate to govern during the worst economic crisis we have ever seen. Thats why I feel there should be an election.

If you are just looking at the global economic crisis from 2008 onwards (i.e. ignoring the Irish property bubble that was pre-existing and was ready to burst regardless of this crisis) would you not agree that this government have reacted as quickly and as effectively as any other Western country and that our recovery rate is as good or better than even some stronger economies.

Het-Field

hallelujajordan wrote: »

If you are just looking at the global economic crisis from 2008 onwards (i.e. ignoring the Irish property bubble that was pre-existing and was ready to burst regardless of this crisis) would you not agree that this government have reacted as quickly and as effectively as any other Western country and that our recovery rate is as good or better than even some stronger economies.

Depending on how much more our banks will need recapitalisation, then the 2009 Budget was the first step which will make any difference. It is a small step, but a step none the less. However, this could be totally negated f another 3 Billion needs to be ploughed bank into our banks to keep them alive.

It is irrelevant to look at the crisis to the exclusion of the banking crisis., or defecit (24 Billion Euro Mind). Other European states didnt need to worry about that. Namely France and Germany who have emerged from recession. Ireland's plight has only been fully articulated in the OECD and IMF Reports. The scale of what needs to be done was articulated by the Taxation commission reports, and McCarthy. We are a small island nation, and thuoly in survey done by periodicles likes the Economist our crisis is never really mentioned in comparison to our European partners.

I dont understand what you mean by recovery rate ? Our recession is going to be one of the last to bottom out, and at that point it will be in such a weak shape that growth will be slow and over a protracted period.

irish_bob

hallelujajordan wrote: »

If you are just looking at the global economic crisis from 2008 onwards (i.e. ignoring the Irish property bubble that was pre-existing and was ready to burst regardless of this crisis) would you not agree that this government have reacted as quickly and as effectively as any other Western country and that our recovery rate is as good or better than even some stronger economies.

agree with all your other posts on this thread jordan but not this one , due to cowens dithering and futile attempts to cut a deal which would please unions , nesscesery action was delayed by at least a year , its only in the last few months that the goverment has got the finger out

hallelujajordan

Het-Field wrote: »

Depending on how much more our banks will need recapitalisation, then the 2009 Budget was the first step which will make any difference. It is a small step, but a step none the less. However, this could be totally negated f another 3 Billion needs to be ploughed bank into our banks to keep them alive.

Would you not agree that the tax/levy increases in the two budgets last year, combined with the spending reductions in the December 09 budget all feed into addressing the defecit issue. Lenihan has been clear since the beginning of last year that he has a long term plan and he has been following it closely since.

Het-field wrote:

It is irrelevant to look at the crisis to the exclusion of the banking crisis., or defecit (24 Billion Euro Mind). Other European states didnt need to worry about that. Namely France and Germany who have emerged from recession. Ireland's plight has only been fully articulated in the OECD and IMF Reports. The scale of what needs to be done was articulated by the Taxation commission reports, and McCarthy. We are a small island nation, and thuoly in survey done by periodicles likes the Economist our crisis is never really mentioned in comparison to our European partners.

Agree that from an economic sense it is irrelevant to look at the current crisis to the exclusion of the property bubble burst and the subsequent banking crisis but it is relevant if you are measuring the performance of the post-2007 government as per my discussion with Taxipete. . Its an argument in a different context.

Het-field wrote:

I dont understand what you mean by recovery rate ? Our recession is going to be one of the last to bottom out, and at that point it will be in such a weak shape that growth will be slow and over a protracted period.

How can you say that . . I posted a report earlier that showed that the Irish recession 'technically' ended already, ahead of the UK and several other nations. . Agree, recovery will take time, but all the predictions are that the economy will grow, albeit slowly in 2010.

hallelujajordan

irish_bob wrote: »

agree with all your other posts on this thread jordan but not this one , due to cowens dithering and futile attempts to cut a deal which would please unions , nesscesery action was delayed by at least a year , its only in the last few months that the goverment has got the finger out

I don't disagree but remember Lenihan did hit the public sector with the pension levy much earlier . . and the government put a huge amount of effort into managing public perceptions around public sector pay before hitting it in the December budget . . the unions need to be managed and the balance between anarchy and cost saving needs to be maintained. So far the Lenihan/Cowen government have extracted a significant amount of cash at the cost of a single day long strike.

BTW, for what its worth I don't believe the line about Cowen dithering and Lenihan rocking in to make the tougher decisions. In my view this was just an excellent good cop/bad cop routine. . a highly effective negotiation strategy.

WoollyRedHat

hallelujajordan wrote: »

How can you say that . . I posted a report earlier that showed that the Irish recession 'technically' ended already, ahead of the UK and several other nations. . Agree, recovery will take time, but all the predictions are that the economy will grow, albeit slowly in 2010.

Most commentators agreed that the premise of us leaving the recession was a false one. We will not grow in 2010, with further re-capitislation of our banks needed among many other problems in the economy.

Het-Field

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Indeed, but if those large international companies are selling more product into a global market then, at least in the short term that has to spell good news for their employees in Ireland. I entirely agree with you that we need to return to a stronger level of competitiveness and I am not for one second saying "Economy is fixed, lets move on now" . . I'm merely pointing to the fact that we are beginning to show signs of recovery.



Not popping my cork and as mentioned earlier, I am not arguing that our employment situation is fixed and we can move forward and forget about this crisis. Simply pointing out a stabilisation in the numbers which has to be a positive sign, even if there are other compounding factors.


While I disagree with most of your examples, I totally accept that there is waste in the system. In my mind, taking responsibility for this is about standing up and trying to fix the problems that exist. That is what I believe the Cowen government is currently doing.

The government act on their manifesto and on the mandate provided to them by the demands of the people. In the case of Ireland we (not all of us LB) were demanding lower taxes and bigger properties. Thats democracy and if they don't do it we will promptly replace them at the next opportunity with a government that will


I don't understand your constant contradictions. The foundations for almost everything you criticise them for were in place before you voted for them in 2007, yet you still voted for them and you now blame a Cowen goverment who have been working to reverse some of these policies.


Agreed, but i present it only as anecdotal evidence that supports the actual evidence and i think it is as good as the anecdotal evidence that says that emigration is distorting the unemployment numbers'

Well, I did a small analysis to try to demonstrate what the impact of this emigration was having on the bigger picture. . And I mentioned their nationalities becaus I think it is important. There is a difference between a brain drain (believe me, I know what this is. . left Ireland with a graduate degree for 5 years in the early 90's because I couldn't get a job) and Eastern Europeans returning home because their jobs in a shrinking construction sector have disappeared.


I think you are overstating it. . I think there will be modest increases in interest rates this year (probably very late in the year) and I don't think it will be trigger a 'national disaster'

You conceed the point on "compounding factors". Any stabilisation will need to be longer term, and will require measurement against these compounding factors. One quarter of so called stabiliation is not nearly enough to start considering that to be the end.

The wastage is down to vote getting. Benchmarking II is a prime example. It was wholly unsustainable, and has had a detrimental effect on Ireland. Equally, Bertie chose to amalgamate the various health boards without redundancies, downsizing, re-appraisal, or re-deployment. That was a means to court the public sectors favour, as with benchmarking II. While i agree with the benefits of the LUAS and Port Tunnel are obvious, it doesnt hide the fact that Millions of Euros were wasted on overspending. The E-Voting fiasco will be a long running joke. I cant believe Ireland shelled out 54 Million Euro to quickly deem Mary "Wednesday" Wallace elected, and Nora Owen sacked. The Government have not even sought to put the machines to good use by stripping the parts down and giving them to computer based charities.

There is nothing wrong with demanding lower taxes. In fact our tax rate was fairly irrelevant to the crisis. All countries have varying tax rates, and some entered large scale problems, and others didnt. It was the 10% Increases in public spending per year. The property bubble COULD have been stamped out by robust governmental intervention. Sadly, the country was aflush with windfall tax money (stamp duty, VAT, Capital Gains Tax), and this allowed the largescale spending binges.

You predicate your belief that negligble raises in interests rates will have a minimal effect. I suggest you hold off until we see the effect once Mr Trichet gets his way. Remember, ireland is not the first country the ECB will think of when re-calibrating the rates.


In relation to my perosnal position on Fianna Fail, I voted for them for several reasons.

First, I wished to maintian the position of the Progressive Democrats in Government. In my constituency, I had no PD candidate, and selected to run with the option which I felt would improve their chances of sustaining their existence. I was already privy to the fact that only one seat was safe, and that the party needed all the help it could get.

Second, I was not as economically aware as I am today. I felt the economy was running smoothly. We knew that the good times were coming to an end, however, we had NO idea that the downward trajectory was to be as swift as it was. As such, I was not willing to attempt to "fix" a model which I felt wasnt broken. The full facts and figures became clear in the wake of the election, and what was being done was completely unacceptable

Third, I was critical of the large increases in public spending, and I felt that FF/PD might deliever a degree of fiscal rectitude when required. The fact that FG were teathered to Labour was also of grave concern However, the 2007 budget highlighted a continued level of profligacy. The 2008 and 2009 (April Budget) were exercise in optics, with many of the more fiscally conservative moves rolled back on. Kicking the medical card to touch, the shelving of the debate as to how we fund third level education were examples of the current government bowing to populism. Equally, the April budget itself had an air of "optics" about it. As I have siad, the December Budget was an attempt to deal with the uncontrolled public finances, however, the

Four, I was completely unaware of the bank's position, and the fact that they had basically placed all Irish investments on 31 Black. There was NOTHING in Fianna Fail's manifesto about NAMA, or any form of mechanism to deal with a self made banking crisis.

Three years is a long time in politics, and I am entitled to regret my decision. I voted the current government into power, however, I was not aware of the full extent of Ireland's situation. It is not to say that FG would have done any better, however, it was not thier profferences and "policies which created the domestic problems, which fall outside of the remit of responsibility of the "Global Recession"

Het-Field

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Would you not agree that the tax/levy increases in the two budgets last year, combined with the spending reductions in the December 09 budget all feed into addressing the defecit issue. Lenihan has been clear since the beginning of last year that he has a long term plan and he has been following it closely since.



Agree that from an economic sense it is irrelevant to look at the current crisis to the exclusion of the property bubble burst and the subsequent banking crisis but it is relevant if you are measuring the performance of the post-2007 government as per my discussion with Taxipete. . Its an argument in a different context.



How can you say that . . I posted a report earlier that showed that the Irish recession 'technically' ended already, ahead of the UK and several other nations. . Agree, recovery will take time, but all the predictions are that the economy will grow, albeit slowly in 2010.

The "technically" is the operative word. In practice it isnt. It was heavily articulated that stabilisation in GNP is NOT the true baromenter for recession tracking. In fact our GDP remains negative for the fourth quarter, and many economists would agree with that, and have agreed with that.