The Economist on Ireland

This week’s edition carries an analysis of the Irish economy: you can read it here.

3 thoughts on “The Economist on Ireland”

  1. Interesting that this Economist piece should be chosen for citation, but not last week’s Economist’s special report on entrepreneurship. The Economist article on Ireland fails to reference other factors that brought Ireland out of the 1980s bad economic situation ie. the growth of world market oriented businesses. Some of these emerged from existing dominant Irish companies (CRH), others from the changes in EU agricultural support (Kerry), others from the “failure” of GPA itself a huge incubator of know-how, more from IT (Aldiscon, Euristixx, Iona), changes in regulation (ESAT Digiphone, Airtricity). The cast of mind of policy makers (on the kinds of things that entrepreneurs can bring to economic recovery) is akin what a South African poet said of liberals in that country many years ago
    You praise the firm restraint with which they write
    I am with you there of course
    They use the bridle and the snaffle all right
    But where’s the bloody horse?

  2. Ireland 1840 pop 8M; 1940 pop 4.5M
    England 1840 pop 10M; 1940 pop 45M
    Ireland’s oak forests are not even a memory. But Britannia ruled the waves with ships made of oak. England also ruled by use of the Golden rule. Then they extended fractional reserve lending to other countries. And eventually the miracle of making money came to Ireland. It later arrived in Iceland. Best to disbelieve miracles? Better not to read articles in Economist. They are based on non-Austrian attitudes to currency. Keep taking the money and the easiest way to get a country to do this? Corrupt its public servants.

    Never forget, never forgive, never give up.

Comments are closed.