Back in June 2008 I wondered if the Elm Park development would someday be seen as "a symbol of everything that went wrong as the economy went into its inevitable property price crash."
That it isn't seen that way today has nothing to do with Elm Park's success, but rather those symbols are too numerous for Elm Park to be singled out for any special acknowledgement. Regardless, the Elm Park development - part of Bernard McNamara's decaying world of properties - will shortly have a receiver. I can't claim any great prescience in our misfortunes, but I knew as soon as I saw what was happening at Elm Park that it would end in tears.
Friday, November 26, 2010
Monday, November 22, 2010
To stay in euro we need to learn how to tax and SAVE
I've been looking for a robust defense of the euro, or more specifically, our membership in the euro following our financial/economic meltdown. I've found two recent columns (here and here).
They're both reasonable if the following assumption is valid: governments can tax and save. I have serious doubts about that, especially Irish governments. Money just seems to burn a hole in the pockets of people in government, partly because the electorate expects that hole to be burned.
I'd like to believe that our Central Bank could have insisted that the banks take a bigger chunk of their profits and put it towards a "rainy day" fund as is/was (apparently) done in Spain. That's the same instinct, though. The shareholders might not have accepted investing in a bank that was compelled to keep the capital ratios above the accepted 12% norm.
Even had the Central Bank done that would that only have opened the door wider to let foreign competition in to undermine the banks? This doesn't excuse the behavior of Anglo-Irish or our regulators or the government, but we should at least acknowledge that everyone was in a new situation - a currency union with countries that were not cyclically in synch with ours.
To be honest, of the three main players the one I blame the most is the regulators. They should have been more forceful with both government and the banks. They should have realized that the old capital ratio rules were at least somewhat in doubt in once we joined the euro.
We need a broader, more robust set of measures by which we assess the strength of the banks. And we need to learn how to tax and save as opposed to tax and spend, at which we've proven ourselves exemplary.
They're both reasonable if the following assumption is valid: governments can tax and save. I have serious doubts about that, especially Irish governments. Money just seems to burn a hole in the pockets of people in government, partly because the electorate expects that hole to be burned.
I'd like to believe that our Central Bank could have insisted that the banks take a bigger chunk of their profits and put it towards a "rainy day" fund as is/was (apparently) done in Spain. That's the same instinct, though. The shareholders might not have accepted investing in a bank that was compelled to keep the capital ratios above the accepted 12% norm.
Even had the Central Bank done that would that only have opened the door wider to let foreign competition in to undermine the banks? This doesn't excuse the behavior of Anglo-Irish or our regulators or the government, but we should at least acknowledge that everyone was in a new situation - a currency union with countries that were not cyclically in synch with ours.
To be honest, of the three main players the one I blame the most is the regulators. They should have been more forceful with both government and the banks. They should have realized that the old capital ratio rules were at least somewhat in doubt in once we joined the euro.
We need a broader, more robust set of measures by which we assess the strength of the banks. And we need to learn how to tax and save as opposed to tax and spend, at which we've proven ourselves exemplary.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Better the euro dies than we leave it
Okay, call me nuts and I don't really believe that our government or Department of Finance folks have this sort of courage, but what if our government has suddenly realized that the euro doesn't suit our economy? Would it be better to leave the euro with our tail between our legs or to hope for the complete collapse of the currency?
The more I think about it the more I think we have nothing to lose. There's no reason for us to simply quit the euro like bad children being asked to leave the playground (although we should never have joined and never have been allowed to join).
Either the Germans (& others) stop pussy-footing around and pledge a genuine solidarity with us, one that includes sharing the pain of the bailout (which was made in large measure by their banks and our forbearance of the cost of German reunification on exchange & interest rates when euro was born) OR we refuse to play ball and trigger a complete collapse of the euro.
If the euro collapsed there would be economic upheaval throughout the EU, particularly in eurozone countries. However, I'm not sure it would be much worse here than what we're facing anyway.
I would never have had such thoughts if not for the noises from Herman von Rompuy today. He sounds like the guy running through a burning building screaming 'Don't panic' while he tries to find the emergency exit.
The more I think about it the more I think we have nothing to lose. There's no reason for us to simply quit the euro like bad children being asked to leave the playground (although we should never have joined and never have been allowed to join).
Either the Germans (& others) stop pussy-footing around and pledge a genuine solidarity with us, one that includes sharing the pain of the bailout (which was made in large measure by their banks and our forbearance of the cost of German reunification on exchange & interest rates when euro was born) OR we refuse to play ball and trigger a complete collapse of the euro.
If the euro collapsed there would be economic upheaval throughout the EU, particularly in eurozone countries. However, I'm not sure it would be much worse here than what we're facing anyway.
I would never have had such thoughts if not for the noises from Herman von Rompuy today. He sounds like the guy running through a burning building screaming 'Don't panic' while he tries to find the emergency exit.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
One WWI story among tens of thousands - my wife's great grandfather
I read Lucinda O'Sullivan's post on her uncle who died during WWI I wanted to read my July 2009 post on our search for my wife's great-grandfather's grave. Only it's no longer on the system at Irish Central, so I reposted it here.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
One of the great things about studying family history is that you find that members of your family did things that make you wonder what they were thinking, what drove them. Often they did things that don't fit the general historic themes you learn about in school and through books.
For my wife and I this process started with regards to Patrick Conway back at the end of May when we first found her great grandparents' census form on the 1911 Census web site. Patrick was "head of family", a "bricklayer's labourer", had been married for nine years and had four children. The oldest child, my wife's grandmother, was nearly 7.
It wasn't even that anything we found was all that surprising, but my wife had never really thought about Patrick Conway other than as the man who was her father's grandfather and that he died in the First World War. The census somehow brought him to life.
We have few hard facts, but we believe Patrick served with the British Army in the Boer War in South Africa around 1900. We also believe he was a member of the Citizen's Army - a worker's militia born out of the Lockout of 1913.
Now that's interesting because in Irish history the Citizen's Army and the British Army ended up on opposite sides during the 1916 Rising, but that was all in the future when Patrick Conway enlisted in January 1915.
So, he was in the British Army, left, married, had a family, worked as a bricklayer, joined the Citizen's Army and joined the British Army again. As my wife thought about all these things and the fact that he was around 38 years old when he (re)enlisted in the Army, the main question was: why? Why did Patrick Conway, a 38-year-old husband and father of four decide to go to war?
And really there was only one answer. He must have been out of work. As a friend of mine said to me recently when I told him this story, "What employer would hire a 38-year-old militant trade unionist bricklayer's laborer?" So simple and straight-forward that it has to be true.
They were harsh times and he probably realized that the army at least offered a wage and, even in death, a pension. Something for his family to live on.
That man was the father of my wife's grandmother, somebody she knew well, but who had never talked about these things. This is why my wife had to go to Bethune, France to visit his grave. We were going to be too near to let the chance slip by.
Bethune is only about an hour over the border from Ypres so we changed our plans to include a visit there. Unlike all the other British military cemeteries that I saw, Bethune is a local cemetery, with a war graves section. It is mostly local French people who are buried there. The war graves aren't exclusively British either. Most of them are British, but there are French and German soldiers buried there as well.
We found Patrick Conway's grave and found that he was buried near four other members of the Royal Dublin Fusiliers, who all died within a day or two of each other. We guessed that they were all injured in the same engagement, but we have no way of knowing. More research.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 | ||
| Cpl. Patrick Conway, d. 28-APR-16 |
For my wife and I this process started with regards to Patrick Conway back at the end of May when we first found her great grandparents' census form on the 1911 Census web site. Patrick was "head of family", a "bricklayer's labourer", had been married for nine years and had four children. The oldest child, my wife's grandmother, was nearly 7.
It wasn't even that anything we found was all that surprising, but my wife had never really thought about Patrick Conway other than as the man who was her father's grandfather and that he died in the First World War. The census somehow brought him to life.
We have few hard facts, but we believe Patrick served with the British Army in the Boer War in South Africa around 1900. We also believe he was a member of the Citizen's Army - a worker's militia born out of the Lockout of 1913.
Now that's interesting because in Irish history the Citizen's Army and the British Army ended up on opposite sides during the 1916 Rising, but that was all in the future when Patrick Conway enlisted in January 1915.
So, he was in the British Army, left, married, had a family, worked as a bricklayer, joined the Citizen's Army and joined the British Army again. As my wife thought about all these things and the fact that he was around 38 years old when he (re)enlisted in the Army, the main question was: why? Why did Patrick Conway, a 38-year-old husband and father of four decide to go to war?
And really there was only one answer. He must have been out of work. As a friend of mine said to me recently when I told him this story, "What employer would hire a 38-year-old militant trade unionist bricklayer's laborer?" So simple and straight-forward that it has to be true.
They were harsh times and he probably realized that the army at least offered a wage and, even in death, a pension. Something for his family to live on.
That man was the father of my wife's grandmother, somebody she knew well, but who had never talked about these things. This is why my wife had to go to Bethune, France to visit his grave. We were going to be too near to let the chance slip by.
Bethune is only about an hour over the border from Ypres so we changed our plans to include a visit there. Unlike all the other British military cemeteries that I saw, Bethune is a local cemetery, with a war graves section. It is mostly local French people who are buried there. The war graves aren't exclusively British either. Most of them are British, but there are French and German soldiers buried there as well.
 |
| The Commonwealth War Graves in Bethune Cemetery |
Thursday, November 04, 2010
Moneyball in the English Premier League?
John Henry is going to try to employ Moneyball tactics at Liverpool, according to today's Irish Independent. Henry is a hedge fund manager so he's clearly comfortable with numbers and his GM at Boston, Theo Epstein, is of the Moneyball generation.
Moneyball was all about Oakland's Billy Beane and the 'genius' he was, but truthfully I always thought more of Epstein than Beane. Beane's teams were competitive, but always seemed to lack the winner's instinct, whereas Esptein built winners. Beane's teams seemed a bit 'soft' in crunch time. And, yes, I know their budgets were vastly different, but still big budget doesn't guarantee much (see NY Mets for all the proof you need). Epstein built good & tough teams - and the Red Sox had to be tough to overcome the curse, the failure of 2003 and the deficit they faced in the 2004 playoffs against the Yankees.
I know nothing of Damien Comolli, who the Independent says is expert at spotting young talent AND "close to Beane." That closeness means Comolli believes in statistics. I guess we're going to learn whether a similar appliance of science can be made in soccer. {I heard the guys on Off the Ball discussing this very subject on Monday, but didn't hear the name of the MLS man they were speaking to about the application of stats in American soccer.}
One thing I admired about Epstein is that, unlike a certain General Manager who used to work in Queens, he recognized that the introduction of drugs testing in baseball would turn a lot of older star players into has beens almost overnight. His team got young quickly, which resulted in their championship in 2008.
Today Liverpool and the Mets are a lot alike. Spending lots of money for little in return. Henry's goal is to make them more like the Red Sox than the Mets. It's an experiment, but I suspect Henry will get Liverpool winning titles again.
{And we Met fans can hope that our new GM will mean a rapid rise back to success.}
Moneyball was all about Oakland's Billy Beane and the 'genius' he was, but truthfully I always thought more of Epstein than Beane. Beane's teams were competitive, but always seemed to lack the winner's instinct, whereas Esptein built winners. Beane's teams seemed a bit 'soft' in crunch time. And, yes, I know their budgets were vastly different, but still big budget doesn't guarantee much (see NY Mets for all the proof you need). Epstein built good & tough teams - and the Red Sox had to be tough to overcome the curse, the failure of 2003 and the deficit they faced in the 2004 playoffs against the Yankees.
I know nothing of Damien Comolli, who the Independent says is expert at spotting young talent AND "close to Beane." That closeness means Comolli believes in statistics. I guess we're going to learn whether a similar appliance of science can be made in soccer. {I heard the guys on Off the Ball discussing this very subject on Monday, but didn't hear the name of the MLS man they were speaking to about the application of stats in American soccer.}
One thing I admired about Epstein is that, unlike a certain General Manager who used to work in Queens, he recognized that the introduction of drugs testing in baseball would turn a lot of older star players into has beens almost overnight. His team got young quickly, which resulted in their championship in 2008.
Today Liverpool and the Mets are a lot alike. Spending lots of money for little in return. Henry's goal is to make them more like the Red Sox than the Mets. It's an experiment, but I suspect Henry will get Liverpool winning titles again.
{And we Met fans can hope that our new GM will mean a rapid rise back to success.}
Court should have stayed out of Donegal by-election issue
Other than Fianna Fail TD's - and probably not all of them - I think I'm the only person who is unhappy (or at least uneasy) with yesterday's ruling on the Donegal by-election.
Yes, the constituency should have 3 TD's and 16 months is an inordinately long time to wait for the by-election, but it's not like the people of Donegal SW are totally unrepresented - they still have local councillors, 2 TD's and 3 MEPs. The court should have left it up to the Dáil as to when the by-election takes place.
Don't get me wrong, I think we should have an election immediately. In fact, we should have had one in October 2008, but the Fianna Fail and Green TD's thought that an extra year or two for them in the Dáil was more important than the fate of the nation. They'll pay a price when the inevitable election comes. I just don't think this is the court's business.
Yes, the constituency should have 3 TD's and 16 months is an inordinately long time to wait for the by-election, but it's not like the people of Donegal SW are totally unrepresented - they still have local councillors, 2 TD's and 3 MEPs. The court should have left it up to the Dáil as to when the by-election takes place.
Don't get me wrong, I think we should have an election immediately. In fact, we should have had one in October 2008, but the Fianna Fail and Green TD's thought that an extra year or two for them in the Dáil was more important than the fate of the nation. They'll pay a price when the inevitable election comes. I just don't think this is the court's business.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Take That tix — "Inc booking fee" does not mean what it seems
MCD says tickets to Take That are €70.70 including booking fee. What does that mean?
One their web site MCD says the tickets are available at that price through the following outlets:
Well, to me that means when you buy two tickets – regardless of how – you should pay €141.40. Yet someone I know was charged €154.10 for tickets bought through Ticketmaster.ie
Shouldn't part of their radio ads include this?
One their web site MCD says the tickets are available at that price through the following outlets:
- From 100 Ticketmaster Outlets Nationwide
- By Telephone (24 Hour):
- ROI - 0818 719 300, Northern Ireland - 0844 277 44 55
- Book On Line: www.ticketmaster.ie
Well, to me that means when you buy two tickets – regardless of how – you should pay €141.40. Yet someone I know was charged €154.10 for tickets bought through Ticketmaster.ie
Shouldn't part of their radio ads include this?
"When we say 'including booking fee' that does NOT mean that the tickets will actually cost what we claim. Additional charges may still apply."
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Irish Times: Obama's unpopular — blame the American people
I can understand a little how Lara Marlowe feels, but I'm too filled with hope to be worried that she's unhappy. Her idol has feet of clay, but she's having trouble accepting this.
She blames "Republican obstructionism in Congress" for President Obama's problems, but this ignores the fact that Obama had (a) large Democratic majorities in both houses and (b) a strong wind behind him when he took office. His problems have NOTHING to do with "Republican obstructionism in Congress" and everything to do with his failure to properly understand what it was that got him elected: (a) anger at the banks and (b) anger at government for failing to regulate.
Obama thought his election was a 1932 moment, a chance to greatly expand the size of government. However, that's not what the voters thought. They thought they were voting for better management, control over those things that were let run wild during the the Bush years. His stimulus plan was a failure and his health care bill was unpopular before it passed and has only become more unpopular since then.
Next Tuesday the Republicans will probably have control of the House and a larger minority in the Senate. If the President wants to get re-elected, he'll have to learn how to actually be bi-partisan rather than merely talking about it.
More than that, he'll have to show a willingness to accept that he has almost no gut-feel for what makes Americans tick. This is what President Clinton had and it served him well. Obama doesn't have it, which means he has to find someone who does and start listening.
She blames "Republican obstructionism in Congress" for President Obama's problems, but this ignores the fact that Obama had (a) large Democratic majorities in both houses and (b) a strong wind behind him when he took office. His problems have NOTHING to do with "Republican obstructionism in Congress" and everything to do with his failure to properly understand what it was that got him elected: (a) anger at the banks and (b) anger at government for failing to regulate.
Obama thought his election was a 1932 moment, a chance to greatly expand the size of government. However, that's not what the voters thought. They thought they were voting for better management, control over those things that were let run wild during the the Bush years. His stimulus plan was a failure and his health care bill was unpopular before it passed and has only become more unpopular since then.
Next Tuesday the Republicans will probably have control of the House and a larger minority in the Senate. If the President wants to get re-elected, he'll have to learn how to actually be bi-partisan rather than merely talking about it.
More than that, he'll have to show a willingness to accept that he has almost no gut-feel for what makes Americans tick. This is what President Clinton had and it served him well. Obama doesn't have it, which means he has to find someone who does and start listening.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Mets fans will go on suffering
Two days ago all seemed perfect with the world. On the morning of the 20th Met fans woke up to the possibility that the baseball gods had finally stopped punishing us after 4 long years. We've endured great suffering for what? We still don't know.
It all started on October 19, 2006 when Yadier ******* Molina hit that home run to turn our dream season into a nightmare. That long winter was followed by two heart-breaking years where our hopes were dashed on the last day of the long season and then last year, which was a disaster from start to finish. The Mets were just plain awful and to top it off, we had to watch the hated Yankees beat the hated Phillies in the World Series.
This year was hardly looking much better until Tuesday night. By the end of the action on Tuesday the Yankees were on the brink of elimination and the Phillies were looking very beatable in their series with San Francisco.
That was only two days ago. Now we look to the future with dread. Both the Yankees and Phillies avoided elimination and, well, let's face it they'll probably go on to win the two in a row they each need. The baseball gods were only playing with us. We are doomed to suffer forever {or at least until April when the new season begins}.
It all started on October 19, 2006 when Yadier ******* Molina hit that home run to turn our dream season into a nightmare. That long winter was followed by two heart-breaking years where our hopes were dashed on the last day of the long season and then last year, which was a disaster from start to finish. The Mets were just plain awful and to top it off, we had to watch the hated Yankees beat the hated Phillies in the World Series.
This year was hardly looking much better until Tuesday night. By the end of the action on Tuesday the Yankees were on the brink of elimination and the Phillies were looking very beatable in their series with San Francisco.
That was only two days ago. Now we look to the future with dread. Both the Yankees and Phillies avoided elimination and, well, let's face it they'll probably go on to win the two in a row they each need. The baseball gods were only playing with us. We are doomed to suffer forever {or at least until April when the new season begins}.
CIT lecturer assumes a lot in wealth tax argument
Cork Institute of Technology lecturer Tom O'Connor says that the "wealthy" have €121bn, which should be taxed. He seems unperturbed by the fact that these people have presumably paid taxes on all of their income while they accumulated this wealth and figures taxing them twice is no big deal.
I think that would be immoral, but I don't want to argue the wealth tax. No, I'm really bothered by the assumptions O'Connor used to arrive at this €121bn figure.
He uses a 2006 Bank of Ireland Private Banking report as the basis for his figures. He then updates the figures in that report using these assumptions.
I think that would be immoral, but I don't want to argue the wealth tax. No, I'm really bothered by the assumptions O'Connor used to arrive at this €121bn figure.
He uses a 2006 Bank of Ireland Private Banking report as the basis for his figures. He then updates the figures in that report using these assumptions.
- BoI breaks down the wealthy into three cohorts: those whose net worth is greater than €30m, those whose net worth is between €5m and €30m, and those who fall between €1m and €5m. O'Connor assumes that each group will have an average wealth near the midpoint in the range. {I believe that it would skew strongly towards the low end each time.}
- O'Connor assumes that the property holdings of the wealthy have fallen in value in line with the national average. {I suspect that quite a few of those wealthy people held land that - or owned shares in companies that held the land - that was valued on its development potential and that they didn't own large tracts of built up neighborhoods or farm land.}
- The wealthy had perfectly diversified share portfolios across the FTSE 100. {He may be right about this, but it's also possible that Ireland's wealthy in 2006 held a disproportionate number of shares in Ireland's banks and property companies, whose prices have since collapsed.}
- The bonds in their portfolio were all European government bonds. {I really don't understand this one. Are we really supposed to believe those were the only bonds these people bought? But, regardless, I could probably live with this one.}
- Bank of Ireland Private Banking made this information public out of the goodness of their hearts and didn't produce a report that would emphasize the importance of their function to the bank.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Ireland's Greatest — joke night
I'm giving serious consideration to watching Ireland's Greatest tonight to see if David McWilliams can make any sort of case that Mary Robinson even belongs in this list. I'm more than dubious.
That Daniel O'Connell didn't make the list is a travesty.
That Daniel O'Connell didn't make the list is a travesty.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Good thing we have loads of money for wasteful road spending
One of the worst aspects of the sort of boom times we're living in is the obvious waste of money among some public bodies. For example, a (completely unnecessary) virtually brand new roundabout in Dalkey, Co. Dublin (Dun Laoghaire County Council area) has been torn up and replaced. The original roundabout was comprised of red bricks, but for some reason that was replaced with a black tar-macadam roundabout this week. Good thing money's plentiful.
Along the same stretch of road the same authority (I assume) installed new red brick speed ramps about 20 feet in front of a new stop sign. Maybe the junction merited a stop sign, I can't say, but what's the point of putting in speed ramps just in front of a stop sign. You have to slow down anyway.
I suppose the only saving grace is that money's plentiful and there's no reason to worry too much about how it's spent.
Along the same stretch of road the same authority (I assume) installed new red brick speed ramps about 20 feet in front of a new stop sign. Maybe the junction merited a stop sign, I can't say, but what's the point of putting in speed ramps just in front of a stop sign. You have to slow down anyway.
I suppose the only saving grace is that money's plentiful and there's no reason to worry too much about how it's spent.
Monday, October 11, 2010
Guinness targeting US market
Guinness is about to undertake a big push for the American market, according to the Wall St Journal. Guinness Black is part of this push. Maybe some people like that, but not me. The four bottles I bought and drank will be the only four bottles of Guinness Black I'll ever buy (will drink it if I get it free!).
The Journal also says that Guinness is gong to start offering its "Extra Stout" product, which "hasn't been sold in the U.S. since before Prohibition." Hmm. Maybe, but I have a clear memory of seeing Guinness Extra Stout in the delis in the north Bronx when I was in college there in the 1980s. And, no, it wasn't only available to those who knew the secret knock that opened the door to the illicit beers.
The Journal also says that Guinness is gong to start offering its "Extra Stout" product, which "hasn't been sold in the U.S. since before Prohibition." Hmm. Maybe, but I have a clear memory of seeing Guinness Extra Stout in the delis in the north Bronx when I was in college there in the 1980s. And, no, it wasn't only available to those who knew the secret knock that opened the door to the illicit beers.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
INBS going after the mortgage market with gusto
Jon Ihle in Sunday Tribune says Irish Nationwide Building Society is going all out to increase its share of the mortgage market for 2011. In 2010 INBS wrote €20m in mortgages, but hopes to get that figure up to €160m in 2011 and €325m in 2012.
That's the best news I've seen in weeks. That's the kind of cheery, optimistic news we've all been looking for. We don't have enough financial institutions willing to do whatever it takes to write new mortgage business. Maybe those 100% mortgages will seem so fuddy-duddy conservative, so 'yesterday' when INBS starts offering 140% mortgages next year. With any luck they'll get that up to 175% by 2012.
This is insanity. Rather than running wild with their bailout money, INBS should be wound up. It's bust, bankrupt, kaput. Time to shut say to goodnight to INBS.
That's the best news I've seen in weeks. That's the kind of cheery, optimistic news we've all been looking for. We don't have enough financial institutions willing to do whatever it takes to write new mortgage business. Maybe those 100% mortgages will seem so fuddy-duddy conservative, so 'yesterday' when INBS starts offering 140% mortgages next year. With any luck they'll get that up to 175% by 2012.
This is insanity. Rather than running wild with their bailout money, INBS should be wound up. It's bust, bankrupt, kaput. Time to shut say to goodnight to INBS.
Non-stop sports this weekend
I'm pretty sure no one in the family is talking to me. They were on Friday, I know that for sure because we all watched the Ireland match together, but I haven't had much contact with anyone since then. I doubt anyone's angry, probably just forgot I was here.
Yup, since the soccer game ended on Friday I've watched or listened to 5 full baseball games - that's at least 15 hours of baseball in just over two days. I'm now on my 6th game - San Francisco at Atlanta.
I also spliced in healthy doses of Notre Dame's game with Pitt last night (on Eurosport 2, with worst ever in-studio , rather than at-game , commentary for any sporting event anywhere). What a weekend for sports watching. I had to squeeze in a couple of meals and cutting the grass, but it's been great. I love this time of year.
Friday, October 08, 2010
James Ellroy's book told me all I needed to know about him
I had never heard of Ellroy when I was given this book, but I thought it was awful. I have no idea if Ellroy is considered good or bad, but I thought this is a book by a guy who has spent his life trying to be cool. Everything about the book - the language, tone, even his sentence structure (or lack of it) - shouted to me, "You gotta live on the edge, man."
Yesterday, he walked out on Cooper when Cooper started asking questions about things Ellroy had written in his autobiography. Ellroy got annoyed when Cooper asked him about some of the racier, edgier details in the book. Then he got all high and mighty and walked out. Totally full of himself, his greatness, his relevance and an ignoramus too. Just as I'd imagined.
Thursday, October 07, 2010
Is Ganley planning on more than this one cup of 'tea'?
Declan Ganley back from the dead? He's been silent for the year or so since Lisbon passed on its second attempt. However, he's been making noise on Twitter the past few days and today he has a column at TheJournal.ie.
His political party went down in flames during the European elections and, well, Lisbon passed pretty easily at the second asking. So Ganley's pretty much a done deal, right?
I dunno.
I read his column and it's full of good ideas - if this were Sep 2008. It's pretty light on where to from here, but if this is just a first salvo then it's a good one. It puts him back on the scene, but not overly committed.
From the column I get the feeling Ganley would like to be the face of an Irish version of the Tea Party movement, but I don't know that he has the appeal to really get people to rally to him. I also don't think Irish people have that 'get government out of the way' attitude that drives the Tea Party.
I also suspect that even if he achieved some success he would find it nearly impossible to renege on all those government commitments to the Anglo bondholders. It's a scary, but popular idea, one that the Irish people would love to see, but one that we've been told would be disastrous.
Ganley probably has the credibility to get the people to believe we could burn the bondholders, that the price of doing so will be less than not doing so and that the EU & ECB will not overreact to such a move. Is he right? There are quite a few economists on his side, but the powers ranged against him are strong. Stronger.
Any effort at building a mass movement against bailing out the banks' bondholders and against higher taxes and more regulations will require tremendous leadership, charismatic leadership. Does Ganley have such ambitions? We'll just have to wait and see.
His political party went down in flames during the European elections and, well, Lisbon passed pretty easily at the second asking. So Ganley's pretty much a done deal, right?
I dunno.
I read his column and it's full of good ideas - if this were Sep 2008. It's pretty light on where to from here, but if this is just a first salvo then it's a good one. It puts him back on the scene, but not overly committed.
From the column I get the feeling Ganley would like to be the face of an Irish version of the Tea Party movement, but I don't know that he has the appeal to really get people to rally to him. I also don't think Irish people have that 'get government out of the way' attitude that drives the Tea Party.
I also suspect that even if he achieved some success he would find it nearly impossible to renege on all those government commitments to the Anglo bondholders. It's a scary, but popular idea, one that the Irish people would love to see, but one that we've been told would be disastrous.
Ganley probably has the credibility to get the people to believe we could burn the bondholders, that the price of doing so will be less than not doing so and that the EU & ECB will not overreact to such a move. Is he right? There are quite a few economists on his side, but the powers ranged against him are strong. Stronger.
Any effort at building a mass movement against bailing out the banks' bondholders and against higher taxes and more regulations will require tremendous leadership, charismatic leadership. Does Ganley have such ambitions? We'll just have to wait and see.
Wednesday, October 06, 2010
Matthew Elderfield says don't burn senior bondholders (Anglo) because of "current difficult funding position for both the Irish government and the banking system." Well, okay, but if we burned them entirely we would undoubtedly have trouble raising money in the bond market, but at the same time we'd owe a helluva lot less. No?
Unmarried fathers would be better off wed
"European family law expert Geoffrey Shannon" says we need new legislation because a court ruling yesterday means "unmarried fathers, even where heavily involved with their children, have to go to court to claim their rights of custody." Shannon was commenting a case decided by the European Court of Justice where an unmarried father was deemed to have no right to demand that his children be returned from England, where their mother had taken them. From the Irish Times report it sounds like the mother left for England before court proceedings here could progress.
I feel bad for the father, Mr McB, but I'm at a loss as to what legislation Mr. Shannon wants. The state already provides for two people to declare that they are committed to one another and that they will share the rights and responsibilities of parenthood. It's called marriage.
Mr. McB would have been better off if had married the mother, Ms E. That's obvious now, but it should have been obvious from day 1 of their relationship. That so many unmarried fathers find themselves in such situations would, you would imagine, eventually convince unmarried fathers and, preferably, unmarried men in serious relationships, to MARRY.
This is what marriage is for. Everything else that our Bridezillas and Weddings By Franc society has promoted is unnecessary. Even religion does not have to feature if the couple would prefer. A simply state ceremony will put the relationship on a solid legal foundation. I'm at a loss to understand why so many people have opted out of marriage and why we as a society deem this situation to be of little consequence.
I feel bad for the father, Mr McB, but I'm at a loss as to what legislation Mr. Shannon wants. The state already provides for two people to declare that they are committed to one another and that they will share the rights and responsibilities of parenthood. It's called marriage.
Mr. McB would have been better off if had married the mother, Ms E. That's obvious now, but it should have been obvious from day 1 of their relationship. That so many unmarried fathers find themselves in such situations would, you would imagine, eventually convince unmarried fathers and, preferably, unmarried men in serious relationships, to MARRY.
This is what marriage is for. Everything else that our Bridezillas and Weddings By Franc society has promoted is unnecessary. Even religion does not have to feature if the couple would prefer. A simply state ceremony will put the relationship on a solid legal foundation. I'm at a loss to understand why so many people have opted out of marriage and why we as a society deem this situation to be of little consequence.
Friday, October 01, 2010
What is "light touch regulation?"
"Light touch regulation" is an expression I've heard a lot lately with regards to the banks disaster. My problem is that I can't quite make out if someone using this expression refers to the regulations being insufficient or whether they were simply lightly enforced.
Any enlightenment welcome.
Any enlightenment welcome.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)