IMF Report on Ireland

[sarahj]

That is a contradictionary statement. If something is new, it cannot have existed previously, hence 'new'. What you are talking about is modification of an idea beyond its original concept.

No such thing as a new idea darling - you can only come up with an idea based on your existing knowledge which yo ugot outside yourself.

Qualify? Who decides those qualifiers? You? A bureaucrat? The market?

Workers work for the business. Most "workers" aren't innovative to start with. With most businesses, smarter or larger ones at least, when people start coming up with innovations that benefit the business, those innovative people tend to get promotion. With benefit to the business comes profitability, profitability comes expansion, greater productivity and/or more workers needed. Assuming no change in raw materials costs (yah, yah, I know) this means the product becomes less expensive to the consumer, which group happens to include the workers.

In your socialist world, that innovator would not benefit as he would be only an equal to everyone else and recieve what everyone else recieves. THAT would stultify innovation. What would the point be in striving when one does not benefit? Look at the 'great' socialist experiments, the USSR and China. The USSR folded economically because the "workers" had no incentive to do more than the minimum, if that. "Innovation" in the USSR was through dictat, rather draconian dictats.
China is fast taking on the aspects of capitalism though still governed by the Communist Party. Outside of the industrial centers, it's still lagging behind most developed countries in quality of life.

Humans are not all equal. Some are stupid, some intelligent, some lazy, some industrous, some altruistic, some greedy. Pure socialism dictates that all are equal regardless of the previous.

There are so many things wrong with that comment - starting with your remark about workers not being innovative.

Socialism dictates that all people should be treated equally, regardless of attributes of luck - which all of your above characteristics are.

The USSR was a dictatorship - hence your use of the word dictat. Of course innovation is strangled in a dictatorship.

Why does it always have to come back to the same old bullsh1t myk? You KNOW that sh1t isn't true and you just keep saying it...

[cd27]

IMF conference call over report:

Transcript of a Conference Call on Ireland

"Let me consider each of these positions in a brief manner. I look back at the imbalances not to assign any blame, but they are a necessary part of the diagnosis. There were three features that were particularly prominent in the evolution of this crisis: overvalued property prices, the vulnerabilities built up within the banks—many of those related to the overvaluation of property prices—and the gradual loss of competitiveness of the Irish economy over a period of several years.

Put together, when the global crisis manifested itself in the middle of 2007, these domestic vulnerabilities interacted with the global crisis and that has now led to what is likely to be a protracted downturn."

[myksav]

Quote:
Originally Posted by myksav
That is a contradictionary statement. If something is new, it cannot have existed previously, hence 'new'. What you are talking about is modification of an idea beyond its original concept.

No such thing as a new idea darling* - you can only come up with an idea based on your existing knowledge which yo ugot outside yourself.

Cobblers, I have one patent and two un-patented, copyrighted ideas which did not exist before I came up with them. Just because you do not come up with new ideas, don't assume others cannot.
*(do not compain about other posters being patronising, when you are being patronising)

Quote:
Originally Posted by myksav
Qualify? Who decides those qualifiers? You? A bureaucrat? The market?

Workers work for the business. Most "workers" aren't innovative to start with. With most businesses, smarter or larger ones at least, when people start coming up with innovations that benefit the business, those innovative people tend to get promotion. With benefit to the business comes profitability, profitability comes expansion, greater productivity and/or more workers needed. Assuming no change in raw materials costs (yah, yah, I know) this means the product becomes less expensive to the consumer, which group happens to include the workers.

In your socialist world, that innovator would not benefit as he would be only an equal to everyone else and recieve what everyone else recieves. THAT would stultify innovation. What would the point be in striving when one does not benefit? Look at the 'great' socialist experiments, the USSR and China. The USSR folded economically because the "workers" had no incentive to do more than the minimum, if that. "Innovation" in the USSR was through dictat, rather draconian dictats.
China is fast taking on the aspects of capitalism though still governed by the Communist Party. Outside of the industrial centers, it's still lagging behind most developed countries in quality of life.

Humans are not all equal. Some are stupid, some intelligent, some lazy, some industrous, some altruistic, some greedy. Pure socialism dictates that all are equal regardless of the previous.

There are so many things wrong with that comment - starting with your remark about workers not being innovative.

Socialism dictates that all people should be treated equally, regardless of attributes of luck - which all of your above characteristics are.

The USSR was a dictatorship - hence your use of the word dictat. Of course innovation is strangled in a dictatorship.

Why does it always have to come back to the same old bullsh1t myk? You KNOW that sh1t isn't true and you just keep saying it...

The Soviet experiment was one of Socialism which quickly became a dictatorship. Every socialist experiment so far has become a dictatorship. Given that constant trend, socialism equates to dictatorship.
Name three Socialist States that are not dictatorships.

[Scorpio]

I don't think I can comment on that article for personal reasons.

I disagree however - you try to cut PS wages by what they consider to be an unfair amount and they WILL all strike.

Ha, hilarious!
A: "Here's some evidence that the public sector is overpaid." <link to Lyons blog>
B: "No, no, that's all wrong, you could never trust averages, what about sole traders, and sure isn't the Taoiseach skewing the whole thing?"
A: "Well, that in theory could explain it... but doesn't. Public sector is up to 30% overpaid." <link to ESRI paper with same finding>
B: "Oh... erm... I couldn't possibly comment. I have to go now."

Says it all really.

[sarahj]

Ha, hilarious!
A: "Here's some evidence that the public sector is overpaid." <link to Lyons blog>
B: "No, no, that's all wrong, you could never trust averages, what about sole traders, and sure isn't the Taoiseach skewing the whole thing?"
A: "Well, that in theory could explain it... but doesn't. Public sector is up to 30% overpaid." <link to ESRI paper with same finding>
B: "Oh... erm... I couldn't possibly comment. I have to go now."

Says it all really.

I'm not allowed to.

[Watcher1]

The most shocking thing about the report is peoples reaction to it. I haven't read all the replies on this thread (35 pages), but the first couple I have read, people seem to be gobsmacked at the sheer scale of our woes. It's like people saying "No one saw it coming" when we first saw the Irish economy tanking/credit crunch.

One of my big takes from the IMF report is that they did indeed tell the idiots in government what was on the way. Lenny or Clowen CANNOT now say that nobody told them, or nobody saw it coming. The fact is, not only did the IMF tell them, but a whole range of people gave the warnings.

I just wish the IMF would come in here now and do what needs to be done. I dont trust the gang of morons in Dail Eireann (including the opposition) can do what is needed to sort us out. The really scary thing about that is, if they dont do what's needed, it will be 2050 before we get back to anything resembling a decent economy.

[toughbutfair]

There's much said by various people that I disagree with but attributing everything in life to luck as Sarah does is ridiculous as is the notion that everybody should get the exact same amount as working hard is luck.

[Middleaged]

There's much said by various people that I disagree with but attributing everything in life to luck as Sarah does is ridiculous as is the notion that everybody should get the exact same amount as working hard is luck.

And she works in the ESRI,which I will investigate..

[Middleaged]

I'm not allowed to - I'm working with the ESRI at the moment.

Akin to the "accounting fraud" in MNC's that nobody know's nor read about.

Creditibility issues are growing.

[irish_bob]

There's much said by various people that I disagree with but attributing everything in life to luck as Sarah does is ridiculous as is the notion that everybody should get the exact same amount as working hard is luck.

my mother attributes all positive outcomes to luck but she has the excuse of being very religous