4 ms·

Or perhaps Ireland's spending was artifically high? Your bias for government intervention is showing.

gaius 12y ago
I've been accused of many thing in my time, but never of favouring government intervention... However you slice it, Ireland was enjoying a quality of life that could not be sustained, paying for it with EU subsidies, which enabled them to charge less tax than running their state really cost, which they used to lure jobs from the UK. Then when the money ran out, those jobs went to Poland or other lower-cost locations, and they went cap in hand begging to England for more money.
- throwawayaway 12y ago
  > they went cap in hand begging to England for more money. You have no evidence of this, the link you posted earlier was a bailout of RBS. You'll have to do better than that. EDIT incidentally, if the jobs were lured from Britain why did they ultimately go to Poland?
- skeolawn 12y ago
  I think it's fair to say that in recent times "Ireland was enjoying a quality of life that could not be sustained" but the explanation you offered is incorrect. In reality it was based on a property bubble and cheap investment capital due to artificially low interest rates engineered by the chief eurocrats. Go back a little further and the explanation for increasing employment in the 90s is based on having a young, well educated and underemployed population just as globalization was really kicking off. Ireland joined the EU in 1973. If "subsidies" and "job luring" are the explanation, I'd have expected to see more progress way back then. I'm not sure where you're going with your arguments that it was all based on "EU subsidies" and "luring jobs", but since others may read this I wanted to correct the record. edit: it is true that the UK lent money to the Republic of Ireland in order to bail out UK banks with massive exposure to the property bubble - a bubble created in large part by the reckless practices of those very same banks. That loan has to be paid back by Irish tax payers.

gaius 12y ago

I've been accused of many thing in my time, but never of favouring government intervention... However you slice it, Ireland was enjoying a quality of life that could not be sustained, paying for it with EU subsidies, which enabled them to charge less tax than running their state really cost, which they used to lure jobs from the UK. Then when the money ran out, those jobs went to Poland or other lower-cost locations, and they went cap in hand begging to England for more money.

throwawayaway 12y ago
> they went cap in hand begging to England for more money. You have no evidence of this, the link you posted earlier was a bailout of RBS. You'll have to do better than that. EDIT incidentally, if the jobs were lured from Britain why did they ultimately go to Poland?
skeolawn 12y ago
I think it's fair to say that in recent times "Ireland was enjoying a quality of life that could not be sustained" but the explanation you offered is incorrect. In reality it was based on a property bubble and cheap investment capital due to artificially low interest rates engineered by the chief eurocrats. Go back a little further and the explanation for increasing employment in the 90s is based on having a young, well educated and underemployed population just as globalization was really kicking off. Ireland joined the EU in 1973. If "subsidies" and "job luring" are the explanation, I'd have expected to see more progress way back then. I'm not sure where you're going with your arguments that it was all based on "EU subsidies" and "luring jobs", but since others may read this I wanted to correct the record. edit: it is true that the UK lent money to the Republic of Ireland in order to bail out UK banks with massive exposure to the property bubble - a bubble created in large part by the reckless practices of those very same banks. That loan has to be paid back by Irish tax payers.