The best solution to incompetence and mismanagement is a pay increase.Cowen destroyed the economy. He cost us billions. He destroyed lives with his incompetence and cowardice.
McAleese and Robinson just cost us their salaries and pensions.
The hostility towards Cowen is that he caused everyone else financial pain, yet he is cushioned from the consequences of his actions by the generous pension. So society responds in the only way it can, shaming him with its hostility and contempt.
The best solution to incompetence and mismanagement is a pay increase.
That seems to be the solution in the Health Sector and elsewhere in the Public Sector and in Banking. If that doesn't work then let them retire on a full pension. Did the Financial Regulator get his pension? Did all the people in the Central Bank? Did all the people in the Private Banks? Why should politicians be held to any higher standards than anyone else in this country?
Cowen destroyed the economy. He cost us billions. He destroyed lives with his incompetence and cowardice.
This is simply not true. In case it has past your attention, the period in question relates to a global economic recession.
but he was the man at the top and it is human nature that his role is focused on.
My point is, it is futile to identifying one person as primarily responsible, albeit understandable to do so.
I always had TBS down as a PBP voter, a champagne socialist Labourite at a push. But an FF supporter....I'm stunned so I am
I take it you are referring to pseudo-socialist populism?The policies that enabled an economic collapse were adopted long before he took the helm, albeit he was a significant player in garnering support for those policies.
I take it you are referring to pseudo-socialist populism?
Monetary and budgetary policy was set by the Social Partners without any input from the Department of Finance with massive long term spending commitments made without any notion of how they would be paid for or what impact they would have on the broader economy and society. If you are blaming our woes on bankers and quantitative easing them you are ignoring most of the picture and confusing the treatment of the illness with its cause.Im referring to policies that ceded monetary policy to banking cartels and then the zero policies to deflate an obvious property bubble, instead allowing it free reign to get out of control.
Which policies exactly?Im referring to policies that ceded monetary policy to banking cartels
Monetary and budgetary policy was set by the Social Partners without any input from the Department of Finance with massive long term spending commitments made without any notion of how they would be paid for or what impact they would have on the broader economy and society. If you are blaming our woes on bankers and quantitative easing them you are ignoring most of the picture and confusing the treatment of the illness with its cause.
Which policies exactly?
Why were we so badly affected then? How come ourselves and the other PIIGS countries were affected with the other, more prudent countries not so badly affected?The economic crash was not a consequence of social partnership. It was a consequence of a global money market credit freeze starting in the US when the house of cards that is the ever-expanding debt based system requires that debt to be paid back at some point.
The policies that ceded our monetary sovereignty to Europe, namely the ECB and the Euro. I cant remember which treaty it was, Maastricht?
Why were we so badly affected then? How come ourselves and the other PIIGS countries were affected with the other, more prudent countries not so badly affected?
Well the other option was to remain outside of the Euro with our own currency, the Punt. Do you think that have been better?
How come other prudent countries did not experience the problems we in the PIIGS countries did? We all had the same opportunities to borrow at extremely low rates? Blaming the system doesn't cut it I'm afraid. Too many people borrowed too much to pay for things they could not afford, at the individual level right up to the government level. Nobody made them.Was it because we were more exposed to the credit expansion/perpetual debt based system by any chance?
You can find these traits in the economies of the PIIGS too.
Hindsight is wonderful thing, but yes is the answer to that.
How come other prudent countries did not experience the problems we in the PIIGS countries did? We all had the same opportunities to borrow at extremely low rates? Blaming the system doesn't cut it I'm afraid. Too many people borrowed too much to pay for things they could not afford, at the individual level right up to the government level. Nobody made them.
Was it because we were more exposed to the credit expansion/perpetual debt based system by any chance?
Im sure you recall the housing boom? This was based on ever expanding credit was it not? 110% mortgages? Mortgages 5, 6 times income?
You can find these traits in the economies of the PIIGS too. Or was our social partnership model, was our public sector bench-marking responsible for their economic woes too?
If you can cast your mind back to Ireland pre joining the Euro and tell me we would have been better off staying with the Punt then you really are just trolling!
There were many factors which fed into the crash and how badly it impacted on us.This is pure fantasy. Here is the link to the first benchmarking report back in 2002. You can search for yourself, a lot of the analysis was based on detail from the Department of Finance, one of the board members of the benchmarking body was from the Department of Finance, and on page 153 you can see clearly that the Department of Finance made its own submission to the benchmarking body.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?