SWITCH, the ESRI tax-benefit model has been used to analyse the distributional impact of the tax and welfare measures in the October 2008 and April 2009 budgets. Results show a significant gain for the lowest income quintile, with losses for other quintiles increasing with income. For details see here for the Irish Times article of Friday 10 April.
Month: April 2009
A highlight in this year’s calendar should be the Geary Lecture by Jim Poterba (MIT and President of NBER): details are here.
One of the things underpinning a lot of posts, notably Karl’s last one, is that there is an elephant in the living room here around the human capital available to deal with economic issues within the core Government Departments. We know the tales of how there are no economists in the civil service. What is badly needed is something like the Government Economic Service in the UK. This ensures two things – the presence of a cadre of professional economists within the sector, but also the harmonisation of the training across Departments giving a unity of approach regardless of the topic. Of course the development of PhD capacity in Ireland will help but that takes time – wondering aloud, should we as a body of economists not begin to work with the Government to develop a GES model for Ireland and also develop the training structures?
ADDENDUM
Thanks folks, for the comments. I am going to stay out of the debate around constitutional crisis this would cause…..and just pick up some threads. Cormac’s comment hits it well and he would know well from working at IFS in London what I mean. The GES is NOT an new body accountable or otherwise – it is a training infrastructure for the civil service that ensures that economists are trained in a way that is consistent across the service regardless of their posting. It also ensures that economists can move between Departments, be redeployed etc very easily and that economics has a core platform within the service. Secondly, the issue is not creating new degrees etc but rather to work with the civil service to ensure that platform is in place. Thirdly, there is both an immediate need for a small, highly skilled cohort now – perhaps this is the 10 or so that Brian L discusses – but the idea that we can continue with the lamentable lack of economics as a core discipline across all government departments needs to be tackled. In effect health, education, environment and employment have no structured economics unit and to revert briefly to constitutional issues, to be relying on external ministerial advisors is worrying. Finally, for sure this would need a change in how things work – the economics unit in the UK looks at EVERY piece of policy and proofs it against standard metrics.
Thanks again, folks, for the comments.
Colm
[Last in Series …. For Now]
Speaking with Myles Dungan on RTE radio on Thursday, Minister Eamon Ryan put forward the following argument against nationalisation:
You have to run the whole bank, the system, from Merrion Street … And there’s no ability, I believe, in the Department of Finance to run six banks at the one time … They [the Department of Finance] recognise that you don’t just suddenly start running six banks. And you can’t do it in a very transparent way.
I think the Minister raises a fair concern here, so I thought I’d throw this one out there as my final (for now) post on this.