irishtimes.com/newspaper/fin … 39491.html
today’s review in the IT of responses to Mk’s article. I know in many jobs there are practical reasons for the lower participation of women but why economists? seems to me like a pleasant job - well paid with family friendly hours…but I must be missing something??
TBH my impression was that there aren’t many job opportunities for proper economists- not just in Ireland - considering the vast number of undergraduates who study the subject.
Given the lack of jobs generally internationally you’d expect a few more foreign born economists in the mix - so you’d wonder how far they far they cast the net. We’re stuck with plodding mediocrity IHMO - their gender is the least important criterion
What the hell is that guys idea of economic ruin???
North Korea, Somalia, Yemen, Nauru, who knows but as bad as Ireland is, we are still in the rich world
I would like to note for posterity that in 2017 we will have nothing like 2007s levels of growth and employment.
Have they no women?
Who makes the feckin’ tea in the Economics departments?
No wonder they’re all a bunch of doomers.
Great, now we’ll have to listen in two year’s time to how if there were more women economists in the Irish Times piece we’d have listened more carefully to what Morgan Kelly said when Dame Enda tells us that “nobody told us to balance the books in a single year”. As if my life isn’t tough enough.
Economists, BoyRacer, economists… not salespeople.
All of them agree with MK’s central arguments and some bicker over details or in McDowells cringe worthy case, his “way of expressing himself”. In other words all are essentially admitting to their own incompetence and failure.
With experts like these who needs economic hit (wo)men.
Maybe Morgan is like NEO in the Matrix.
The matrix of bad economists may have invented him to create the illusion of hope 
All this talk of default by him also strengthens the case for an inevitable debt write-down. So the DoF probably like him now.
Does anyone know what the write off would be if the ECB (or whatever institution was propping up our bond prices for a while there) let us redeem them at the price they paid not the par value?
doubt if they’d have made any better remarks and all comments by the male economists have missed the point. there was super business woman Norah casey’s contribution on last sunday’s dunphy show, she missed the point too.
the point being is that ireland wont be a good place to do business unless we tear up the eu/imf deal. after a week of shite talk , no one has dared comment on the first line of prof. kelly’s column.
Applying same analysis to all Ireland’s debt makes no sense - MAARTEN van EDEN → irishtimes.com/newspaper/opi … 33816.html
In many ways this article is a more damning indictment of the last governments policies and especially NAMA than anything Morgan Kelly has written. In his own quiet undramatic way van Marten utterly eviscerates NAMA and the thinking behind it, making pretty much the same points we have been making on the pin since the draft Bill was published.
The short story. The Irish government / regulators / bankers were/are a bunch of monumental fuck ups. They made pretty much the worse decisions possible before, during and after the crisis and if you think Kellys gottendamerug fantasies are a realistic option with out some very serious repercussions (i.e pain far far worse that most of you can imagine) then you are in for a very steep learning curve.
Given Van Edens background and experience and not only the fact that he went public but also wrote in the terms he did makes this probably the most interesting op-ed piece in a long time. It tells me that informed outsiders who have got to see inside the kimono think that the current political / regulatory / banking leadership in Ireland is still at little more than Childrens Crusade level of competence and they still have not either grasped or accepted just how serious the crisis is. I also get the impression that Van Eden thinks that Ireland is beyond internal reform and will enter some sort of conservatorship in the medium term if the current national and international institutional frameworks remains in place.
This is a most interesting statement.
Government as a “sector” aka state capture.
Would this be widespread thinking?
Its been so since Oct 2008. Its actually the other way around. The state is subordinate to the banks, not vice versa. In the past when the banking sector was nationalized (France 1944 , BoE 1946 etc) it was fully subordinated to the needs of the state and the political needs of the day. In the case of Ireland the needs (and now survival of the state ) has been completely subordinated to protecting the private Irish banking status quo. This is way beyond regulatory capture which is what has happened in other countries.
Abso-frigging-lutely.
To be honest, I believe this all to be part of the grand design to copperfasten the European elite, the Commission.
By de facto busting all the PIIGs, they will be handed the one thing they’ve been without all along, the ability to organise their own budgets and they’ll do that by taking over the finances of the second tier European countries. In return, the debt will be restructured and forgiven but it’ll be a common European budget for a number of countries.
Which in effect, will be jmc’s “guys off the street” running the economy but in a different sense.
Just praise jebus, Patrick Bartholomew never got near the EC Presidency… 