TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 10 °C Sunday 26 May, 2013

Column: Spending public money – where’s the master plan?

Former trader Nick Leeson has an idea to sort out the State coffers – get a bunch of hard-nosed business people to assess the waste and root out value for money.

Nick Leeson

I HAVE BEEN travelling quite a bit lately, various places, different cultures, very different people. But there’s one constant, every time I return to Galway, there’s a new set of roadworks.

I can’t immediately say whether it is the same in the rest of country but against the backdrop of a country that is on its knees financially, a public health service that is under so much pressure that hospital patients are left waiting on trolleys, thousands living in abject poverty and a government that is aggressively wielding the axe in making cuts and dreaming up new taxes, I find it difficult to rationalise the large number of people engaged in what to the untrained eye appears largely meaningless developments.

I’m told that somewhere there is a master plan. I fully understand that there are certain grants and allocations that if unused are not renewed in following years but surely common sense should prevail. In Galway, one roundabout has been replaced by traffic lights, two others have been moved slightly and may have been changed marginally in size and one other is such a hive of activity that nobody is quite sure what is actually going to be the final outcome.

As I’ve said I am told that there is a master plan but I cannot fathom it. For me, quite simply it is a waste of money.

When things are tight, you tighten your belt, you allocate money wisely and you make sure that you get value for each and every penny that you spend. None of that appears true here. But most of all you place money where it is most needed.

How can we bring a halt to the wastage?

It made me wonder though who allocates funding in Government and probably more importantly: are they qualified to do so? If they aren’t, which unfortunately is my conclusion, then what needs to be done to make sure that we make change that will bring a halt to the wastage?

In Ireland we are governed by a coalition government that is made up largely of ex-school teachers, a couple of ex-bankers and a number of career politicians. The government lacks hard-nosed successful business people who take tough decisions to make a living to stay ahead of the competition. I don’t think someone in that category would have approved money spent in any of these ways.

Remember the technological advances that the state sought to introduce to make voting simpler in Ireland. Electronic voting was introduced to Ireland in 2002 on a trial basis. Plans to extend the e-voting project began in 2004 but ran into difficulties and it was eventually abandoned in 2009. A confidential report in 2002 expressed serious concern over the security of the voting machines. As of October 2010, the total cost of the electronic voting project had reached €54.6 million, including €3 million spent on storing the machines over the previous five years. Storage!!

Would Michael O’Leary have bought e-voting machines? I really don’t think so. Or if he did, he would have charged you for using them and made a profit.

The Mahon and Moriarty tribunals were both convened by recent governments to investigate irregularities in the way certain issues were handled. Both achieved very little, other than inflate the bank balances of a number of already wealthy lawyers. Neither reached worthwhile conclusions, neither told us much more than we already knew. Both, in my opinion were an utter waste of money. The total cost of both tribunals is estimated to be well in excess of €350m. Not exactly small change!

The solution is to get hard-nosed business people to properly assess where public money is being spent

There are many more. These three instances alone will top out in the region of €500m. I have no idea of what cost the roundabouts are being moved in Galway but you can add it to the list. The solution for me is to get those people missing from the make-up of government – the hard-nosed successful business people  - to sit astride a non-political disbursement process that properly assesses where money is spent and uses far better assessment techniques than have been employed in the past in making such decisions, common sense being at the top of the list.

We hear this week of a possible new inquiry. It has been reported that efforts will be made to shed light on the decisions which led to the 2008 bank guarantees. I think I can short circuit this and save the country a lot of money. Let’s call it the Leeson Tribunal.

The report would go like this: The banks found themselves to be in grave difficulty after running amok for a number of years. They had covered up the situation as long as they possibly could but the situation was haemorrhaging out of control. They’d kept the government informed but had reassured them that they were able to cope. On 29 September, 2008 they informed the government that they really didn’t have a clue.

The two parties, those without a clue and those without any understanding, then sat down to compare notes and see what needed to be done. The think-tank came up with one solution: a bank guarantee that was ill-conceived and badly thought out but did the one thing that they needed, bought them some time to have another go at it. And another. And another.

The conclusion? When faced with the problem, both parties were found to be incompetent. That should save a couple of hundred million and ten years!

Read Nick Leeson’s columns for TheJournal.ie >

Read next:

Comments (104 Comments)

  • Isn’t this the nub of the problem. I hate paying taxes – who doesn’t. What I hate most though is how its spent. Like Leeson, I see round about repairs, road signs replaced with what appears to be the same road signs and you have to wonder, “what f*&kin genius made this decision”. Leeson is right. The PS should be ran as a business, with the customer at the heart of everything they do…

    Reply
  • They’ll never bring in a “hard nosed businessman” like michael O’Leaey because they know he would spot fundamental problems such as 170k a year salaries on top of dry cleaning expenses, on top of travelling and mobile phone expenses that don’t even exist. Salaries being paid while 45 year olds simultaneously claim massive pensions while still working.

    “lads, ive done a few quick sums and it seems that after we pay ourselves theres not enough money left to run the country….” “..so what, i can’t afford to take a paycut!”

    Reply
  • A voice of reason! Our mostly incompetent politicians would resist this assault on their gravy train to their very last breath! Reform, cut the waste and I am confident the Irish people would gladly contribute what they can to the cause. Good article Nick.

    Reply
    • “I favor the policy of economy, not because I wish to save money, but because I wish to save people. The men and women of this country who toil are the ones who bear the cost of the Government. Every dollar that we carelessly waste means that their life will be so much the more meager. Every dollar that we prudently save means that their life will be so much the more abundant. Economy is idealism in its most practical form.”
      Calvin Coolidge

      Reply
  • Excellent article…I’d agree whole heartedly with Mr Leeson..money and especially public money should be dispersed and spent by those used to dealing with it…not teachers or lawyers. Give the likes of Michael O’Leary, Denis Brosnan et al a very tempting renumeration package and 12 months and see what they can do…couldn’t be any worse than the current crowd.

    Reply
    • If people are free to leave then it’s not really exploitation, there is no force or coercion involved, the employees choose to work there, because it’s the best job they can get with their skill set. You could argue that there are no honest employers out there. But if you’re willing to pay more for the goods and services you use then you can find them easily enough. Do you do your weekly shop in Tesco, Aldi etc. Or do you buy all your goods at the farmers market. Same goes for clothes etc. Please elaborate on why you think companies should pay there employees more. Do you go to the shop and say ah right this loaf of bread is euro. Nonsense the bread is worth at least 150, here take my money. That’s exaclty what your implying the owers of businesses should do.

      If you don’t then I hope you can see the holes in your argument. The reason why people buy ipods despite human rights abuses in Chinese factories etc is because they are much cheaper to produce then they would be if manufactured in Ireland or America. Do you own any apple good’s or dell. What are you using to write these posts? Did you consider buying the ethically built computer, or did you try to get the best value for money? If these companies did not set up in China then the people there would not have any work. Who are you to say that they are better off without those jobs? If a majority of people wanted ethically produced goods then the market would provide them at a premium.

      The reason why people shop at Tesco is because they provide a wide variety of goods at affordable prices. Which is what the vast majority of people want, otherwise these big companies wouldn’t be driving local grocers out of business.

      I will watch you video when I get a chance.

      Reply
    • Apologies Tony, that post was meant as a response for the comment one further down.

      Reply
  • Ah road works…. Sadly Nick your not alone, there are roadworks in EVERY bloody county today , yesterday and I assure you tomorrow…. As I wrote in a previous forum weeks ago, they took the bend out of a road outside the village I reside… Now here’s the chuckle , there are roughly 60 bends on that road between the two villages on a 12 km stretch… Waste of money oh yes.

    Reply
  • Great article by Nick Leeson.However,I would question his qualifications in light of the Barings fiasco.There is a
    master plan.The Politicians strive to stay in power as long as possible and maximize their salaries,pensions and expenses.Civil servants and Quango parasites have a similar game plan.Patriotism,idealism and altruism are not part of the mix.

    No need for enquiry into Bank Guarantee.Lenihan and Cowen were surrounded by Bankers Civil Servants and Politicians.Only item on the agenda was how to keep the Gravy Train on the tracks.Simple solution : Screw the Taxpayer.Law Crowd licking their lips at the thought of another Enquiry.

    Love Special Delivery Unit.Get Civil Servants to fix problem which they caused themselves.Add a man in charge who only lives here part-time to ensure failure.Radical thinking will not be entertained.Basically it is a card shuffling exercise with only one object in mind,to make Dr.Reilly look good.

    Michael O Leary has I believe offered his services for two hours each week to the Cabinet.No chance that this offer would be accepted as he would show up the Pygmies for what they are!

    Reply
  • Nick is right about the waste but his proposed solution will do nothing to curb the incompetence in the public service. Transparency and accountability for decisions and actions of civil/public servants are primary imperatives.

    Reply
  • Mr Leeson hits the nail on the head.
    The waste has to be tackled in a ruthless and systematic fashion.
    The penny should have dropped for most. There is no magic pot of gold in Leinster house or anywhere else. The more the state squanders the more it will be taking out of everyones pockets including the disabled and unemployed. The household tax and watermetering is not simply a sadistic troika plot. It is a means of funding continued profligacy and waste.
    We should now realise that when government promises more they are promising to take more from our right pocket to put in our left pocket minus their own deductions.

    “Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods.”
    ― H.L. Mencken

    Reply
  • Don’t get me started on Road Works -

    A whole stretch of road was tarred recently – Then two days later Huge Speed bumps where put it, the width of the road. Then a few days later they where back and they dug up the middle of the Road to put in dividers. Then another few days they where back digging the tar again to move the drains up to the road level. To me this sums up the problem in the local councils.

    Reply
  • Don’t let research get in the way of an argumentative column….

    Reply
  • To be honest Nick the roundabouts are a bad example, something has to be done about them, they are mental and the one at the Galway shopping centre/N59 is downright dangerous, no one seems to have a clue what is going on!

    Reply
  • Getting someone to go through public expenditure with a fine tooth comb – great idea!

    Except we already did that. Remember Colm McCarthy’s An Bord Snip report? Problem is not identifying places to reduce spending; it’s implementing it.

    Reply
  • We’ve already had An Bord Snip Nua for example so we know where the waste is. It’s a matter of having the political will to do it. Business Leaders and Political leaders are in no way the same thing. Running a business is much different to being a political leader running the country and being restraint by a lot more than just shareholders- you have the party, the the cabinet, the legislature, international agreements etc. So no, a business person would not make much of a differencem he/she would be constraint by the same actors as poltical leaders face.

    Reply
  • Why should THEY worry about how they spend I mean WASTE MONEY when it is ours and NOT theirs. They will all end up with big fat pensions anyway because it seems the more they mess things up the better they get paid.

    Reply
  • Every time we are given a directive by the government we are told it comes from Europe. Taking this into account, has the time come to get rid of the “Middle Man” ie: The Government? The directives can keep coming from Europe and the civil servants can continue to administer as they are.

    Reply
  • Hard-nosed businessmen, eh? How about Sean Quinn? He has some spare time these days. How about Dennis O’Brien? Sure who even remembers that corruption nonsense?

    Reply
  • Lots of common sense there Nick but, sadly, in politics that doesn’t come into play precisely because it is well…politics. It’s all about holding onto votes. Roadworks in Galway or anywhere else keeps the local voter happy. Tribunals are an industry and provide highly-paid jobs directly and indirectly through associated services.

    Reply
  • Come on Nick. Lazy populist nonsense. You clearly didn’t bother doing any research either. Which, unfortunately, rather undermines any attempt to make the case for cost saving measures.

    As for the ‘hard nosed business man’, it is a popular trope but it fails to appreciate that the hard nosed business man is concerned solely with making a profit. The objective of public service delivery is to deliver the best possible service to the public. It should of course be done in the most cost effective manner possible, who in their right mind with contradict that approach?

    There are endless articles to be written on the merits of efficient public spending. And believe it or not Nick, there are very serious efforts being made now by those who work in public services to manage declining resources as efficiently as possible.

    But your path of least resistance in the face of a deadline has ensured yet another trolling polarisation of public and private sector advocates. It gets us nowhere. If you are going to write about how to manage the public finances (and not have people referring to the unfortunate financial disaster for which you are best known) take the time to do some research. Talk to the local authority whose road maintenance has prompted you to go on the offensive. It is the very least your readers deserve in return for their time.

    Reply
  • This guy should be writing about white collar crime and the lack of prosecution. He would be more qualified. What he has said is typical populist nonsense.

    Reply
  • Wasn’t the banking crisis brought about by the practices of “hard-nosed business men” and the success of their lobbyists and lackeys in government and academe in convincing incompetent governments everywhere of the virtue of lax regulatory frameworks?

    Are you proposing that we replace elected officials with technocrats, do you understand the difference between the pursuit of private interest and the general public good?

    Reply
  • Great article Nick… But unfortunately common sense is not so common!

    Reply
  • private sector welfare is the biggest drain …… ps hard nosed business men = sociopaths no thanks!

    Reply
    • have to laugh at all the thumbs down. quick refresher . whats the bank guarantee? NAMA? etc..

      the lack of tax for the superwealthy buisness owners is a form of welfare http://www.eapn.ie/eapn/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/wealth-distribution-in-ireland.pdf. capital gains tax of business owners is lower than income tax. there are countless tax breaks and loopholes for the superwealthy business owner. i could go on but id be here all day ….

      Reply
    • Asinine, ignorant, and totally stupid comment. Completely lacking in any concept of what got us here.

      The private sector is the source of all wealth. It was because of SOME lazy and unaccountable civil servants (bank regulator for example) who failed to regulate and an irresponsible political sector (Charlie Mc, etc.) who drove it on for personal gain.

      Reply
    • paul, you have yet to grasp the fundamentals of capitalism , the worker is the source of wealth. the private sector im referring to is the business owners. the business owners exploit the workers and derive profits.

      Reply
    • @Paul Lanigan

      What you’re forgetting is that the banks (private sector) were more than happy with the light touch regulation as it enabled them profit quickly and wrecklessly. Now you’re bemoaning the lack of regulation and blaming the civil servants on the crash? Nobody forced the banks to lend at stupid rates without any regard for sensible lending practices. They did it off their own bat. The onus was on them to run their businesses ethically and responsibly and they failed in this regard. To suggest otherwise is an attempt at airbrushing what got us here. I’m not absolving the regulators (or lack of them) for their role in this. The point I’m making is that neo-liberal capitalists are happy to have all the benefits of lack of regulation but will not use their freedom responsibly. When the inevitable crash happened as a result of their policies, they went cap in hand to us taxpayers and blamed the lack of regulation which they were so happy to enjoy during the boom years.

      Reply
    • @Phantom Duck Nibbler

      Sorry I gave you a thumbs down for your second comment. I meant to give a thumbs up!

      Reply
    • “you have yet to grasp the fundamentals of capitalism , the worker is the source of wealth. the private sector im referring to is the business owners. the business owners exploit the workers and derive profits”

      Your logic is interesting. If there were no business owners, there would be no workers. Therefore its the business owner, not the worker who is the source of wealth.

      If you envy the so called wealth of the business owner – why don’t you become one?

      Maybe its the fact that the business owners up and down this country who don’t have a clue where revenue is going to come from. What about the business owners, many I know personally, who haven’t take a wage in months but continue to pay their staff?

      Over 90% of businesses in this country are small owner managed, many of whom are struggling to get by. They continue to pay huge rates to fund local services while you and your ilk just contribute your poisoned diatribe

      What about those businesses making profits…..do the owners make good money? Sure they do. It’s these people who pay 80% of all the tax in this country. Tax that pays for all the services you militant socialists are so fond of consuming.

      Stop playing the bloody victim and start contributing

      Reply
    • the link above was typed incorrectly so just reposting http://www.eapn.ie/eapn/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/wealth-distribution-in-ireland.pdf , and paul the disparity in the tax take just highlights my point , ill let the rest of your post speak for itself

      Reply
    • no problem mark , ps great post :)

      Reply
    • Your definition of a great post is one you agree with.

      So wealth distribution is uneven. So what. No everyone works as hard, applies themselves or takes the same level of risk. That’s life.

      There is nothing that’s stopping you, me or anyone else from taking a piece of that wealth – but by working for it rather than begrudging those who have it.

      You’re still playing the victim.

      Reply
    • Josef Stalin tasked Soviet Russia’s top economist to let him know when and how capitalism would collapse under the weight of it’s own inequality and greed.
      Nikolai Kondratieff’s findings so disappointed Stalin that initially the dictator sacked the economists. Then he had Kondratieff shipped to a gulag. Finally, he was executed in 1938.
      A couple of morals to this story:
      Capitalism may not be perfect, but it beats the alternatives everytime.
      An equitable Marxist system requires a tyrannical regime to take from the haves to give to the have nots.
      It is childishly simplistic and inaccurate to blame capitalism for this crisis.

      http://www.mysmp.com/technical-analysis/kondratieff-wave.html

      Reply
    • @phantom duck Nibbler

      Seriously mate, how can you expect anybody to take you seriously if you don’t engage with people who take the time to write insightful counter arguments to your point of view. ‘ill let the rest of your post speak for itself’ I mean really, have you just realised that you’re way out of your depth or are you just too lazy to articulate a response?

      As Paul said, this is not a zero sum came whereby ‘the fatcats’ are stealing from the working class heroes. There is nothing to stop you or anyone else there from starting a company and generating some wealth. Instead of living off the productivity and drive of others. A job is not a right, it is an agreement between you and an employer to exchange your time and labour for money. You need to provide value to justify the agreement.

      Reply
    • brian, first im not your mate and secondly pauls post was not in the least bit insightful and highly insult full to boot, thats why i didn’t bother replying … check out @profwolff if your interested in what capitalism is about.

      Reply
    • ps brian your remarks are highly insulting also , typical of right wing thinking…….. presuming about how i earn my money…. a debate with the likes of you is beneath me …..

      Reply
    • sorry posted without explain you implied that im somehow ‘living off the productivity of others’ you have no idea of how capitalism works , i explained above how it works its very simple…. not rocket science…..the employer exploits the worker and derives profit … your the one out of your depth

      Reply
    • pauls insight … ‘the employer is the source of wealth’ lol :)

      Reply
    • @PDN – you make snide remarks from behind the veil of a false name. If you had any balls you’d use your own name.

      You’re still not backing up your points with any that resembles logical argument.

      Tell me why, is clear logical argument why the business owner is not the source of wealth. I might not agree with you, but I’d respect a reasonably argued perspective, but your snide comment below is completely meaningless.

      Maybe it’s because brainwashed with your ULA beliefs but when you pull back the covers you find your argument is naked?

      Reply
    • ok ill try again , i work in a greasy spoon cafe , i make 100 euro of dinners in this hour , the owner who sits at home twiddling his thumbs pays me 10 euro and pays 70 euro in other cost costs per hour ( ie the food , the rent , his accountant a manager etc..) out of this 100 leaving a profit of 20 euro per hour that he sticks in his pocket …….. nice series explaining the theory http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wkO3qsZY_U&feature=youtube_gdata_player

      Reply
    • ps you better buy some clothes quick

      Reply
    • @PDN

      What about all the time and effort and risk associated with setting up the business? I have lots of friends who have set up their own business and five years later the company has failed Leaving them with nothing to show for their time and effort and all the money they invested is gone. If it’s so easy why didn’t you march into the bank (which you could have done before the recession at least) get a loan and set up your own restaurant, you caould have paid you employees more and served whatever you liked? Please answer me that question instead on posting hour long videos as smoke screens.

      Reply
    • and less of the insults paul

      Reply
    • its included in the costs i gave brian, i wouldnt open a business like that as its exploitation , cant you grasp that? ps when a business goes bankrupt what happens? no risk there ….. but remember a worker takes a risk also as he could be out of a job anytime ….. pps since when was logic a smokescreen?

      Reply
    • ps brian…… did the people you talk of not buy things during the operation of the business? eg their house , car , etc……
      now i think its time you did some study instead of off the top of your head ‘logic’

      Reply
    • brian if i did set up a cafe ethically , i would not be the owner and would not have employees………. it would be called a co op with shared ownership with a share of the profits ……ie socialism

      Reply
    • and for all you know brian , maybe thats what i am doing ……

      Reply
    • How is it exploitation exactly? Are you being forced to work there. If you don’t like it then can’t you leave at any time and set up any business you like. I just used the restaurant as an example as I figured if you’ve worked there a few years your’d have reasonable idea of how that industry works ways to improve it. If you don’t have any valuable skills then people aren’t going to pay you very much for you labour. If you are setting up a CO-OP. Then I wish you all the best with you endevours. But let’s be honest here, if history is anything to go by there is more likely to be forced labour in a socialist economy then in a capitalist one.

      An entrepreur invests his own time and money and if the busniess fails he gets nothing, it’s often months of years before a business owner pays themselves a salary during which time they might live on their savings/with their parents. One friend set up a spa treatment in Dublin, Galway and I think Sligo where fish come and eat the dead skin off old womens feet (pretty random, I think he saw it in Thailand or something). He hired all the lads girlfriends and friends to work in the shops who were delighted with the opportunity to get a bit of extra cash. He ended up doing very well out it. This was after a few other businesses that had failed to get off the mark each one costing him thousands or ten’s of thousand.

      You as an employee on the other hand can just quit at any time if you feel you are being exploited. So I find a hard time agreeing that the employees risk is somehow equal to the business owners? Do you see what I mean?

      I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect people to watch long videos or read big documents as a prerequisite to being allowed to debate with you. You can’t expect people to take you seriously if your answers to theirs post are ‘ please watch a video’.

      Reply
    • after me explaining exactly how its exploitation you ask me how is it exploitation? ps … i already said i would not set up a business as its exploitation

      alot people base their ‘logic’ on ideology and are therefore not open to critical thinking and after awhile you get tired repeating the same thing over and over again …. so i post a link instead. :)

      watch it if you can its really good

      Reply
    • If people are free to leave then it’s not really exploitation, there is no force or coercion involved, the employees choose to work there, because it’s the best job they can get with their skill set. You could argue that there are no honest employers out there. But if you’re willing to pay more for the goods and services you use then you can find them easily enough. Do you do your weekly shop in Tesco, Aldi etc. Or do you buy all your goods at the farmers market. Same goes for clothes etc. Please elaborate on why you think companies should pay there employees more. Do you go to the shop and say ah right this loaf of bread is euro. Nonsense the bread is worth at least 150, here take my money. That’s exaclty what your implying the owers of businesses should do.

      If you don’t then I hope you can see the holes in your argument. The reason why people buy ipods despite human rights abuses in Chinese factories etc is because they are much cheaper to produce then they would be if manufactured in Ireland or America. Do you own any apple good’s or dell. What are you using to write these posts? Did you consider buying the ethically built computer, or did you try to get the best value for money? If these companies did not set up in China then the people there would not have any work. Who are you to say that they are better off without those jobs? If a majority of people wanted ethically produced goods then the market would provide them at a premium.

      The reason why people shop at Tesco is because they provide a wide variety of goods at affordable prices. Which is what the vast majority of people want, otherwise these big companies wouldn’t be driving local grocers out of business.

      I will watch you video when I get a chance.

      Reply
    • brian , if you look arond people dont have choice of jobs, there is a shortage of jobs worldwide. and as i explained in the example all businesses are exploitation … its what makes capitalism capitalism. other than that i dont really know what point your trying to make , your basing you argument as if the system of free market capitalism was all there was and no other options are available to us. the video will explain all . sorry i dont have time to go into the details here.

      Reply
    •      “Most people who read “The Communist Manifesto” probably have no idea that it was written by a couple of young men who had never worked a day in their lives, and who nevertheless spoke boldly in the name of “the workers”.
      Thomas Sowell

      Reply
    • sean that quote is a perfect example of an ad hom attack

      Reply
    • @PDN
      You have yourself, on more than one occasion, dismissed the validity of ideological rhetoric. Yet, when I reference a quote than questions the bona fides of an ideology, it is an ad hominem attack. Is this not contradictory?
      When your starting position is one of self-pity and victimhood you will never see your circumstances improve, whether you live under a capitalist or marxist system.

      Reply
    • Let’s look at your maths here PDN (if that’s your real name)
      ” i work in a greasy spoon cafe , i make 100 euro of dinners in this hour , the owner who sits at home twiddling his thumbs pays me 10 euro and pays 70 euro in other cost costs per hour ( ie the food , the rent , his accountant a manager etc..) out of this 100 leaving a profit of 20 euro per hour that he sticks in his pocket …….. nice series explaining the theory”

      So the owner makes a margin of 20%. Out of this she has to pay taxes: both her own as well as her contribution to rates, your PRSI and so on. For all the risk they’re making as much as a cook in the cafe. Why should they bother?

      You haven’t really thought this through have you ?

      What exactly is it you want? To complain? Well you’ve found the forum but look what has happened: your ideology doesn’t work in the real world.

      Please do “go on” about the “countless tax breaks and loopholes for the superwealthy business owner” and educate us all. You say you’d be here all day but let’s face it: you appear to have all day. Oh by the way: Capital Gains Tax is lower than Income Tax for a reason. It applies to everyone: even you. Yes, you could avail of the lower CGT rate. There’s nothing stopping you.

      I’m off back to work now, I’ll check in later tonight to read your solution. I’m sure it’ll be worth waiting for.

      Reply
    • peter i included all that under costs , try harder :)

      Reply
    • No, you didn’t, you clearly stated 20% profit.

      I’m not biting any more.

      Reply
    • yes peter thumb twiddling is very risky :) , pity you cant follow logic , watch that documentary as im finished here….

      Reply
    • sean , im basing my analysis on facts not ideology, …ps .das kapital is the book that your thinking of ., now im finished with you both … waste of time talking to dullards pps heres something else to ponder , capitalism is an unstable system….. what does that mean? you probably dont even realise …

      Reply
    • peter your back very quick, ok even if tax was paid on this profit my argument still holds, you grasp of logic is non existant

      Reply
    • sean , im aware of that ,but im strictly talking about the economic theory

      Reply
    • sean you can safely go back to dullard status :)

      Reply
    • “To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.”
      ― Thomas Paine

      Reply
    • and sean thumbing up your own comment is just the icing on the cake :)

      Reply
    • sean your a great man for the quotes , but this one is ironic :)

      Reply
    • @PDN – forget about profit for a moment – can we agree on this statement?

      ‘Business Owners are Job Creators’

      Reply
    • can we agree on this also ‘slave owners were job creators’ :)

      Reply
    • That just makes no sense

      Let me alter my statement to make it easier

      ‘Can we agree that business owners create paying jobs’?

      Maybe you could answer my question directly?

      Reply
    • paul , of course they create jobs, thats capitalism….but that does not alter the critique of capitalism that exposes its exploitation of the workers …. capitalism is not the only way to create jobs …. your logic is just working

      Reply
    • that should have been ‘your logic is just not working’ , didnt mean to excite you :)

      Reply
    • paul, if your open minded have a listen to this brilliant lecture series http://rdwolff.com/content/marxian-economics-intensive-introduction

      Reply
    • and paul before you jump in …..just because a business owner own the company does not mean he creates the wealth ……. ive already explains this….

      Reply
    • @PDN.

      I’ve watched over three hours of professor wolff’s videos I’ve identified a few discussion points below. I hope that you will appreciate the trouble I’ve gone to so that I can engage in the debate on your terms and not be as dismissive as my arguments as you have been up until now.

      In the first ‘session’

      He discusses how Marx saw it as a type of labour organisation evolution from slavery to feudalism to capitalism to ‘this something else that you have referred to’. He draws very distinct boundaries between slavery and capitalism. You on the other hand seem quite happy to lump slavery/feualism/capitalism into one bit pot of misery for the average working man. Do you acknowledge that you’re generalising. This kinda thing isn’t helpful it merely confuses and the debate. Capitalism is not slavery. They are not the same thing.

      His states that the definiton of exploitation (as you referred to) is specific to Marx. In future you should try to learn how to state you arguments in such a way that a lay person can understand you.Do you get what I mean? Otherwise you’ll end up repeating what’s just happened here. Not much point in arguing if you drive your prospective audiance away in frustration. When you keep saying that the employer/employee relationship is exploitation without elaborating as Wolff did.

      Session 2
      He doesn’t discuss social mobility……at all, which is a pretty glaring omission. I believe in treating everybody equally, but I have a serious problems with people who want to MAKE everybody equal. Humans are incentive driven animals. If you remove the profit incentive, innovation will stagnate. I don’t remember reading about many slaves becoming slave owners or serfs becoming lords. There is LOADS or evidence that shows that the more free (in the libertarian/capitalist sense) a society is the more social mobility there is. Consider the northern american states that made up the union in the 19th/20th centuries.

      His description of markets ‘I’m going to give this shithead the least I can and take the most I can from him’ (that’s actually a quote) is iffy to say the least. If you don’t give people value for money they will take their business elsewhere. Most successful businesses drive a hard bargain but ultimately want both parties to feel like they got a good deal, so that there is a chance for recurring business. He is an acedemic and doesn’t really seem to know how business is done in the real world. In a state monopoly i.e socialism there is only one provider of a service so it’s much more likely that a consumer will get a shitty service.

      Has this guy done anything other then teach and read books. Or is he just caught in an intellectual bubble as marx was? There is a reason why senior academics (speaking from my experince on IT projects) frequently perform poorly in the real world…..their ideas are just that ideas with no basis in the real world and generally very impractical.

      Show me a country run on marxist ideals that has a functioning economy……actually show me such a scenario that hasn’t ended up with millions dead or in forced labour camps?

      You’ll probably come back and say that they weren’t REAL MARXISTs. But that’s the problem with state run ecomonies……they ALWAYS end up in a bloody mess….with the general population in a much worse place then say where Ireland is at the moment.

      Reply
    • brian , thanks for watching the video,

      im aware of the differences beyween slavery capitalism etc…on the lumping of slavery and capitalism, i i wasnt doing that , i was just highlighting the fact that both create jobs for people to do

      social mobility is a fantasy for most people and does not address the continuing poverty in society …

      the ad hom attack that he is a professor is just lazy

      a marxist society would be one where the workers decide what they do in the workplace, not a state body. this has not happened yet…. dont blame marx for that…..

      Reply
    • ps the profit incentive is proven wrong and wrong again in for example science …. did einstein work on his theories because of profits, do i help somebody that has fallen on bad luck because of profit , do i play sport because of profit, do i play music because of profit…….

      and markets are exactly as he describes …… its just the reality ….

      Reply
    • ill refine the idea of workers controlling the workplace, they would basically replace a board of directors ,

      Reply
    • one more thing , regarding capitalism and shitty services , only the rich can afford good services, the rest of us get the shitty ones.

      Reply
    • seems like this debate has reached a dead end…i i dont have all the solutions but i know what the right direction is to work out a better word and its not capitalism and markets….. look around the world and just look at how messed up it is.

      Reply
    • @PDN
      I
      Paul Lanigan
      @PDN – forget about profit for a moment – can we agree on this statement?
      ‘Business Owners are Job Creators’

      PDN
      can we agree on this also ‘slave owners were job creators’

      You are clearly equating capitalism with slavery. I’m glad you now acknowledge that the are different. You need to pay more attention to the words you use as it’s always very clear what you mean

      If you look as the social history of america the number of people living below the poverty line has increased and social mobility has steadily decreased as the welfare state has grown from it’s very humble beginnings at the start of the 20th century.

      How is it lazy?! You build this guy up as if he some sort of messiah with all the answers. He’s an academic. When he introduces himself he list all the degrees and Phds he has and fair play to him. Obviously a very clever guy. But him saying he has all the answers for a failing economy is like a Monday morning out half who has never picked up a rugby ball criticising the Irish team from the comfort of his couch. He has NO real life economic experience.This is a FACT!

      With regard to the profit motive, you’re correct when it comes to the extreme end of the spectrum. So a banker who get paid 2 million isn’t going to working twice as will for the prospect of an additional 2m in fact I think it’s been proven that he might be worse. At the other end of the spectrum you priests monks, scientists,artists etc who have no profit motive. In the middle though I’m pretty sure there is a profit motive, there def seems to be amongst the majority of people my age.

      ‘and markets are exactly as he describes …… its just the reality ….’ This isn’t a logical argument. You’re basically saying it’s true because it’s true.

      Regarding your statement on a marxist society, workers setting up a business and running it. There is nothing stopping you from realising your marxist dream. Why don’t you set up your co-op and live it. I genuinely think that it’s a great idea. If you’re serious I would love to hear what ideas you have and maybe provide you with some support in getting it off the ground. What’s stopping you?

      Reply
    • one last point

      i never said slavery equated capitalism , your not making sense

      example

      ‘a dog rides a bike’

      ‘a man rides a bike’

      from your logic a dog is a man

      now im fed up with your pseudo intellectual rubbish goodbye

      Reply
    • sorry didnt see the last part of your post, at least you at last are seeing some light, but now imagine me having this same conversation over and over again…. and ps capitalism wont disappear because of co ops , its a start but the capitalists will fight back…. the solution is to make capitalistic exploitation illegal…. ok im tired now… sorry i didnt see the last part … i was just tired…..

      Reply
    • and remember the co ops will be operating in a capitalist society and subject to market forces….

      imagine of a capitalistic operation open up beside this co op and undercut its prices? ….

      only solution is to abolish capitalism……..

      ok got to go

      Reply
    • If the basic tenets of free-market “capitalism” include the full recognition of property rights, the sanctity of voluntary contract, and the relegation of government to a minimalist role as arbiter — and, reluctantly, as enforcer — of last resort, it can hardly be argued that we have ever actually lived under such a regime.

      Indeed, the roots of today’s woes — as of those suffered innumerable times in the past — lie not in whether this or that regulation was sufficiently well-crafted or implemented, but rather go deeper into the issue of whether banking as currently instituted is — in any way, shape, or form — an activity consonant with such principles.”
      Sean Corrigan

      Reply
    • Would Albert Einstein have pursued scientific excellence under a Marxist regime?
      Let’s see what he reckons.
      “Any power must be an enemy of mankind which enslaves the individual by power and by force, whether it arises under the Fascist or the Communist flag. All that is valuable in human society depends upon the opportunity for development accorded to the individual.”

      Reply
  • And Michael O’Leary has just announced that he believes the solution to our problems to be right-wing dictatorship on the Right Hook.

    Reply
  • Thank you Mr Leeson, for your report. The level of waste that I’ve seen dealing with different social welfare departments is shocking. There is no joint-up thinking, no rules, no checks or balances. I dread to think how much their overheads and consumables costs. If you question anything, staff make you life hell and I paid into the system when I was working! If only those who are working, knew what I know, there would be uproar in the morning.
    I wouldn’t mind but the system is so mind-numbingly complicated that even the staff don’t know how it works. At the stage the department of social welfare and the CWO have made my life so unbelievably difficult that I can’t do anything without permission any more.

    Reply
  • Govt & governing isnt all about making hard nosed business plans. Most of its about education, health, justice social services. Areas that cant be glossed over with a business approach as they never turn a profit.
    Seeing as Ml O’Leary or Nick for that matter never put their names on a ballot paper what right has he or any other hard nosed business man to decide on governmental policy?
    Why didnt they seek election or if they wanted to work for the government put themselves forward as advisors or even do an interview for the civil service?
    We live in a democracy, although we mightnt agree with policy etc we still vote for who’s in power.

    Reply
  • Seriously- Nick Leeson lecturing about fiscal responsibility?!?! This has to be some sort of joke- do people remember why Nick Leeson is famous, or infamous?

    Putting aside his dubious credentials, the article itself is completely useless- no actual research, no real facts other than a few figures about e-voting machines. The whole thing has the feel of an essay typed out while having a drink down the pub. 2 hours before its deadline.

    “Tighten your belt and allocate money wisely” that’s your advice!??! You aren’t actually giving any solution here, you’re simply taking aim at easy stuff: e-voting/tribunals and saying that they were bad.

    No mention of public sector reform Nick? Or would that require you to do some actual research before you started typing?

    Reply
  • Aurfur 17/04/12 #

    There is no answer. Every conceivable form and type of government ever devised has failed to live up to the expectations of the people as far back as history can go. Every group has its own interest at heart and won’t prejudice it. Even within posts to the journal I never remember a 100 percent agreement in any subject. Therefore there will always be a discontent number of people. I can’t see hard nosed business people or politicians slashing their own wages and standard of living for instance. The necessities of life are equal for everyone. The luxuries are not. Maybe there needs to be an equalising of wealth and property amongst everyone but I can’t see any group other than the poorest agreeing to that. Until everyone has the same standard of living there will always be discontent. If the privilege rich had their standard forcibly reduced then they would be discontent. The household charge and the sewage charge forcibly reduces the standard of living of many to differing extents, but very few willingly accept it, unless it doesn’t affect them. Even those not liable to the charge will have it passed on by their landlords eventually and they will then be discontent. What the charge has done is divide an already fragmented people into more groups. But that is the current solution, weaken divide and conquer the masses. There is no equitable solution to suit everyone within the current system. The current system is unsustainable. Income has to match expenditure. Balance the books in is first step. Cut waste. Someone on 100k could have their wages slashed to 25k. That would then provide 3 more jobs. 4 if the original job holder resigned. Means test the original job holder and put him on the dole only when his assets qualify him. So that simple solution gets 4 people off the dole, places one person on the dole without benefit. That will cut the welfare bill if all wages were slashed to sustainable levels. But no one will ever agree to take real meaningful austerity measures because it won’t suit.

    Reply
  • Whilst I agree with much if the article I have an issue with the author. We should really take stock of this as much as the article itself!

    Reply

Add New Comment