Heroes?

Hmm. Businessman Ulick McEvaddy described the Anglo 10 - the 10 businessmen who bought Anglo-Irish shares with money borrowed from Anglo-Irish - as "heroes."

“I think they’re heroes to have supported the bank in its hour of need,” he told RTÉ Radio. “We’re in an economic war and if we don’t have a good, solid, stable banking system, we’re going to be in serious trouble.”

I wish I'd heard the interview McEvaddy gave RTE because the most obvious question in the world is, "If they were heroes they'd pay back the €300m, right?" All they look like right now are people who were willing to engage in subterfuge in the hope of getting a payday at the end of it.

For sale in Buffalo - get em while they're hot(?)

The Irish Independent's property pages features a rental property in Buffalo, NY. {Why? I have no idea. I would have imagined that the whole overseas property thing was over now.}

It reminded me of the day - must be 10 years ago when I was working for Citibank here. I was talking with a bunch of younger employees - younger by 15 years or so - and they were asking me about Buffalo. All they knew about it was that they had to regularly deal with people working in Citibank's office in Buffalo.

They wanted to know what Buffalo was like. They'd been talking about it and they'd decided that it was a modern town, with mountains near-by full of healthy living people with western/cowboy-like virtues. How sad. I suggested that they were probably thinking of Boulder, Colorado and not Buffalo, NY. (They didn't even know Buffalo was in New York.)

By the time I'd finished with my description of Buffalo - a rust belt city with Arctic like winters (only snowier!) - their romantic visions of business trips to Buffalo were gone. Even the promise of Niagara Falls near-by held little appeal.

CFD's

I can remember when I first heard of Credit Default Swaps how I spent hours looking for an explanation as to what exactly they were, how they worked and what attracted people/companies to them.

I'm having the same experience now with Contracts for Difference. I'd never heard of them until ... was it the weekend? Monday? I can't remember, but very recently. And, to be honest, I'm stunned that such a product exists and that the stock exchange allows it.

At least with the CDS I could see the logic of how it came about, as a hedge on risk. {Of course the CDS soon morphed out of all recognition and became a big part of the bankers' boondoggle.} From what I can make out CFD's exist to (a) allow traders to avoid paying stamp duty, (b) allow traders to trade with very little down (up to 50 times the cash outlay!) and (c) to allow investors to take positions in a share without having to declare that to the Exchange. On all levels this just seems wrong.

In 2006, according to the Sunday Business Post, 50% of all trading on the Irish Stock Exchange was accounted for by CFD's. 50%. I must have been asleep. I can't believe I never heard about this before.

I guess that's what happens when you pay too much attention to war or baseball or your family - you miss out on a chance to make serious money taking others for suckers.

It's every man for himself

Sorry for the silence this week. I've been busy hoarding canned goods and reading survivalist web sites - amazing how many useful tips there are in the Captain Dave's Survival Guide. I can't get over how unprepared I am for the economic Armageddon that is about to befall us.

If you read Morgan Kelly in yesterday's Irish Times and David McWilliams' column from last week, you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. "The end is nigh" doesn't have half enough urgency to it.

Last week I was talking to a friend of mine about what might happen if we defaulted on our debts. And although I wasn't lying, I don't think I really believed it was possible. I thought I was too negative. I was really only guessing, but I told my friend that if we defaulted I thought the Germans would basically come in and call the shots. All state obligations would be out the window. Those include public sector pension entitlements, salaries for teachers, nurses, etc., infrastructural spending, ... I painted a pretty gloomy picture.

Then I saw the weekend reports that said that Ireland could, in fact, default. And yesterday Morgan Kelly spelled out what default might look like.

We would be forced to seek an international bailout, with the International Monetary Fund and European Union playing bad cop and good cop. We could expect cuts of one-quarter to one-third in public sector wages and social welfare benefits, and draconian tax rises to bring the deficit back to around 5 per cent of national income in two years.

And that's if the IMF & EU can bail us out. If other EU nations happen to be in a similar situation, then all bets are off. Kelly talks about a nightmare situation that would lead to "unprecedented civil disorder."

I wonder if they do MRE's at Lidl?

"We're making a commitment to you."

Anyone who's uneasy about the €7bn recapitalization of AIB & Bank of Ireland got a major confidence booster yesterday when they opened their newspaper. Right there amid the seemingly endless articles on the problems with our banking system and the scandals at Anglo-Irish (with a big dose of Irish Life & Permanent) thrown in, was a full page ad with "a message from AIB."

AIB wants us to know that they are "absolutely committed to fulfilling" their "obligation" to "play a role in helping to get our economy back on its feet." They want to help if we "want to buy a new home" or if we "need credit support for a viable business".

And, best of all, they have thanked us for "the support you've extended to us."

I can't tell you how reassured I was after I saw that ad. No need to worry that there might be more "unknown unknowns" lurking in the bank's books, as David McWilliams recently speculated.

And, right at the bottom of the page, the most comforting line of all: "Allied Irish Banks, p.l.c. is regulated by the Financial Regulator." Now, don't you feel all warm inside?

And what was Bank of Ireland's share doing at that time?

Just so I'd have something to compare it with, I checked Bank of Ireland's share price and trading volumes for the same period as I did for Anglo-Irish below. Here is the table.



I'm not sure I can say anything definitive about the movement of Anglo's share price or the trading volumes. What you see is that Anglo is more volatile over that period, but whether that has anything to do with the IL&P deposit is impossible to say. What's not impossible to say is that nearly 50,000,000 Anglo-Irish shares were traded between September 29 and October 10. And, it seems pretty unlikely that all of those who were buying and selling were aware of what was going on.

Did the market react to the IL&P deposit?

Just out of curiosity I decided to go back and see how Anglo's shares were doing around the time that IL&P and Anglo-Irish were playing fast and loose with Irish company law.

Here's a little table I put together. Note where the share price was on Sep 29 before the funny business started and where it was when business closed on October 7. I still have to track down the exact date that IL&P got its money back from Anglo, but if it was on or before October 7 then it seems possible that the Anglo's share price was affected by the coming and going of all that money.

He's still not unemployed

Okay, in today's Irish Independent, Niamh Brennan says that the IL&P transactions with Anglo-Irish bank "meet" the definition of "financial statement fraud", which is an offense in Irish law. F R A U D.

Now, let's go back to the Minister for Finance. He missed the bit in the report about this fraud because, well, he didn't read the report. But, even if had read the report and, in particular, the bit about the fraud, he wouldn't have done anything differently.

It really is mind boggling. Even if he'd been aware that these two banks had engaged in criminal activity it wouldn't have bothered him. Shareholders and potential new investors be damned. You may think the law is on your side, but it's not really.

So, my theory is that this is a big, big problem for Ireland as a potential destination for overseas investment. Am I right? Maybe not. From what I can see in the British & American media, the reports have basically overlooked this element of the Anglo story. The reports have focused on what went on between the two banks and not on what the government didn't do but implied it would have done, if the Minister had read the report last October.

I still think that somewhere down the line, all this mismanagement and, well, how about malfeasance by the government is going to rise up and bite us just when we might have hoped that things were going to get better. But, whether or not I'm right about the overseas investment doesn't change the fact that the Irish government has given me the impression that the laws intended to protect me as a potential investor in Irish shares don't actually protect me. They may be on the books, but the government will overlook them if there are big banks involved in deliberately deceiving investors.

It may be that Irish people will be very shy about returning to the market knowing that game is rigged and not in their favor. It may be that Irish pension funds will be less willing to invest in the Irish market. Time will tell.

Lenihan must be fired

No decision taken by the Government was affected in any way by the fact that I did not read page 129 of the report, because my officials read page 129 of the report.

That was the Minister's lame attempt to dismiss the fact that he didn't read the full report and, thus, missed the fact that there was some (at best) fairly questionable dealings between Anglo-Irish Bank and Irish Life & Permanent last September.

In case you missed it, Anglo Irish loaned €7bn to IL&P who then turned around and placed it back with Anglo-Irish through one of IL&P's non-banking subsidiaries. This all happened as September was winding down, which happens to be when Anglo-Irish's reporting year winds down too. How would this move make any real difference? Well, thanks to the fact that IL&P used a non-banking subsidiary Anglo could book the money as a customer deposit rather than a loan from another bank. And that matters because "[c]ustomer deposits are regarded as a more secure source of funding than deposits from other banks."

Get it? The money goes on a circular journey from Anglo to IL&P and back again, but along the way it acquires a character that allows Anglo to appear a better bet for investors than it was.

Now, back to the Minister. He says that this information in the report he received in October (but didn't read) wouldn't have affected how the government acted. Well, okay, but from October the Irish government should have been aware that Anglo-Irish and IL&P had connived to potentially defraud investors out of their money. But such information wouldn't have affected how the government acted. If I had bought shares in Anglo between mid-October and January 15 when the bank was nationalized I'd be looking to sue the government for withholding such information.

If they withheld such information, but of course they didn't withhold it because the Minister never absorbed it in the first place. Regardless the message to any potential overseas investor is that you don't matter, our laws don't really protect you.

Who in their right mind would invest in Ireland again? Who? Why can't the Taoiseach see this? I've heard mention of the word 'stability' and how we can't afford instability in this crisis. Well telling the world that Ireland is a rigged game is not the sort of stability we can afford. The Taoiseach needs to fire Lenihan and now. Before the day is out.

He didn't read the report

It beggars belief. The future of the state is on the line and the Minister for Finance can't be bothered to read the full report on the state of the banking system, a report that Irish Independent says "was to form the cornerstone of Government consideration of how to address the emerging financial crisis." Okay, so it's 700 pages. If you can't read 700 pages on what is emerging as a threat to the state then what are you doing in your position?

Honestly, I've hardly been able to think about anything else today. I get the feeling from the papers that the Minister was busy, but what was he doing that he couldn't find time to read the report between October & Christmas? I just don't accept that there was never any time to read the full report. Read it, think about it, talk about it with the Taoiseach, members of his department, other cabinet officers, the leaders of the opposition, etc. It's unbelievable.

I can't believe he hasn't resigned yet.

NYC 400

I remember being in Dublin during 1988 when we were all celebrating the Millennium. It was sort of a great joke among all the city's residents because the idea that Dublin was founded in 988 was based on pretty flimsy evidence. Dublin existed before 988. All that happened that year was that some Norse King came and set himself up as ruler and well, I guess, declared Dublin (re)born.

Dublin's founding in 988 may only be tenuously connected to anything real, but it is like a mathematical proof compared with New York's 400 anniversary celebrations this year. When was New York founded? Well, we were always taught it was founded by Peter Minuet when he bought Manhattan from the Indians for $24 in 1626. I think a few Dutch families may have settled there in 1625, but that's about it.

So, what happened in 1609 that merits celebrating? Well, Henry Hudson sailed up the (now) Hudson River. He may well have pulled into the right near the mouth of the river for a night's sleep on his journey north, but I don't know if you can call that founding a city.

Regardless, New York City is celebrating its 400th 'birthday' and the Dutch appear only too happy to join in. Of course, if the banking crisis gets any worse maybe the Dutch will take it back and then pursue the Indians for a refund.

B of I pay cuts needed

Last week's big story was the government's imposition of a pension levy on public sector employees. Although I agree with the government's decision, I don't like all the flippant language about overpaid public sector employees, etc.

The government overspent and over-promised and public servants are going to pay a price for that. Sure too many were hired in recent years and sure it would have been better if they had never been granted all sorts of pay hikes, but neither of those is really the fault of the workers themselves. I don't blame them being angry. It's much harder to see your pay fall than to have never seen it rise in the first place.

I agree with the government's decision AND I have sympathy for the public sector employees. Tough choices, tough times.

Then on Saturday I saw this headline: Bank of Ireland staff get 3.5% pay rise. Well, now I'm annoyed, but I presume that the public sector workers are livid. They've been asked to take a pretty big cut in pay and yet here are those people who are for all intents and purposes becoming public sector employees - and workers in failed entities at that - and they're getting a pay hike. Why?

The Minister for Finance needs to step in right there and put the kibosh on that decision. If the Bank of Ireland and AIB are going to be splitting €7bn of taxpayers' money, at the very least their workers should be expected to experience the pay cut pain that the public sector workers are expected to endure.

Mad Men

I had never seen an episode of Mad Men before last Tuesday. I had never seen it, but I'd heard a lot about it. Mostly people - men, actually - raving about how great the series is.

Last week I watched the first 4 episodes from the 1st season while I was sitting on the plane to NY. I can't say it isn't good, but I couldn't shake the eerie feeling that I was staring at a depiction of point zero, the very start of the growing diabolical, soulless hole in American life. I don't want to see any more of it.

Snow courtesy

And, another thing about last week's snow. I got the bus from the airport to just outside my neighborhood. I only had to negotiate the sidewalk the length of my neighborhood, which turned out to be a good thing.

Despite the fact that the snow had finished fairly early on Thursday evening, no one in my neighborhood had cleaned the sidewalk in front of his house. Not one house. There were a few driveways that had been shoveled clean, but even those people didn't see fit to shovel the sidewalk.

I can't say I was annoyed or surprised, but it was slow going over the snow and ice with my bags. However, along the way I passed out an elderly woman who was making very slow, fearful progress on foot. If every household had bothered to spend 10 minutes (at most) shoveling in front their house that old woman would not have had to walk as if in a minefield.

Keystone Kops Airport

I was in New York last week for a few days. Well, 48 hours.

Anyway, when I arrived back on Friday morning it was dark, but I could see snow all around. I was surprised it wasn't cleared better from around the planes, but it didn't look like a whole lot and I didn't think much of it. Then late Friday I heard on RTE that there were long delays earlier in the day due to the bad weather.

At first I thought I must have been hearing a report from the day before because it had snowed on Thursday, but not on Friday. But, no. The report was about delays on Friday. I checked RTE's web site and found this:

Dozens of flights at Dublin Airport were either cancelled or delayed after icy conditions left aircrafts unable to refuel.

Look, I know it snowed a little on Thursday and it was chilly on Friday, but if temperatures of around freezing (0°C / 32°F) were that big an issue for airplanes then the airport in Minneapolis would be closed for 5 months of the year.

Michael O'Leary described Dublin Airport Authority as Keystone Kops and it's hard to disagree with that. 3 inches of snow causing two days of delays is a joke.

Europe & trade

Of course, Europeans are also worried by the protectionist noises coming from Washington, although a number of EU members have also been looking for ways around free trade.

The United States will not get away with expanding a "Buy American" protectionist measures as part of its economic rescue plan, European Union officials warned Thursday.

"The one thing we can be absolutely certain about is that if a bill is passed which prohibits the sale or purchase of European goods on American territory, that is not something we will stand idly by and ignore," European Commission trade spokesman Peter Power told journalists in Brussels.

George Walden in yesterday's Sunday Telegraph explained that the problem may be obvious, but avoiding protectionism may take the kind of political will that's simply not there.

Protectionism is a disease that contaminates everything and is a cure for nothing. To resist it governments will need huge reserves of political will and an internationalist spirit, both of them currently in short supply.

A major reason Obama's election was welcomed across the world was his pledge to make America less isolationist-minded, but if his first major economic act ignores the needs of the global economy and provokes a trade war with the European Union, how likely is it that China or Russia or India or South America will play by the rules?

… At Davos Chancellor Merkel said her bit, but Germany, whose industrial base equals those of France and Britain combined, has also set up a fund whose transparent intention is to shield exports, and declined to take actions, such as cutting carbon emissions, that might have the effect of costing jobs.

Looking to President Sarkozy for a staunch line on the subject would be somewhat quixotic in a country that was the author of the Common Agricultural Policy, where a protectionist spirit runs in the blood, and respected writers are openly calling for the retreat not just of France but of Europe itself behind greatly enhanced trade barriers and tariff walls. To understand the political pressures and inter-European strains in the offing, one only has to observe last week's riots in Paris, of which we shall see many more, and the fact that the cost of a French or German car exported to Britain has increased by a quarter in recent months.

Last summer Barak Obama said "we're going to change the country, we're going to change the world". I'm assuming a destructive trade war was not what he had in mind. Therefore, he must resist the protectionist forces within his party or the world will change in ways nobody wants.

"Buy American"

How quickly the mood can change. I was watching the news the other night and I thought President Obama already looks older, his face more drawn.

The conservative media in America is being rejuvenated by one tainted cabinet appointment after another, and the President is - for reasons that totally escape me - taking on Rush Limbaugh. Maybe the President wants Rush around, figures Rush is a vote winner for him. I don't know.

Anyway, the Rush vs Obama battle is a distraction. The real alarm bells are ringing in Canada. Levi Folk of Canada's Financial Post writes:

[p]lans by U.S. Congress and President Barack Obama to put a fence around its US$825-billion stimulus package by implementing a "Buy America" policy is a veiled attempt to export unemployment to the rest of the world.

Want more? How about this from the Canadian TodaysTrucking.com?

"If these Buy America provisions are applied, they would have a significant and detrimental impact on Canadian businesses exporting to the United States," Jayson Myers, president of the Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, says in a letter to International Trade Minister Stockwell Day. "Canadian manufacturers and exporters need reassurance that the national treatment provisions of the NAFTA and our other treaties with the U.S. provide a safeguard against the restrictive provisions of proposed U.S. legislation."

Prime Minister Stephen Harper told national media that the provision "goes against the spirit of free trade."

And, probably the best is this one from Michael Den Tandt of the Winnipeg Sun.

But now it seems the House of Representatives wants to do likewise -- for real. As it now stands the $819-billion (US) stimulus bill says that any steel used in any project funded by the bill must be made in the United States.

And it could get worse. The Senate reportedly wants to amend the package to require that virtually all stimulus-funded projects use only U.S.-made goods and gear.

That's against the law -- international trade law, that is, which the U.S. has always championed. It's also the absolute worst policy imaginable in the face of a recession. Protectionism is a virus. Its spread in the early '30s was a main cause of the Great Depression.

… We are America's largest export market, by far. Canada buys more U.S. exports than all 27 countries of the European Union, combined -- though they have 15 times our population.

Another tidbit: Canada is the largest foreign supplier of U.S. crude oil, larger even than Saudi Arabia. Canada supplies virtually all of America's natural gas imports, which fuel many of its power generation plants.

Can we afford to see a wall go up along the border? Nope. But neither can the United States of America. Members of Congress would do well to remember that, as they set about crafting a final version of this bill.

This is how trade wars start: little moves that spark a tit-for-tat, up-the-ante type battle until everyone's a whole lot poorer and underemployed. The President has to resist the calls for "Buy American" provisions in any new stimulus package.

Good luck with that, Joe

RTE editor Joe Zefran is suing the Obama Inauguration committee for "emotional distress". Poor ol Joe had bought tickets for the 'neighborhood ball' online, but "because they were purchased too late for them to be sent to him by post, he was told they would be available for collection at the event itself". {added} Unfortunately, there was no place for Joe to collect his tickets.

Not only is Joe out the price of the tickets, but he also spent "€55 on a haircut and other money on a tuxedo for the evening and would be seeking a refund for these expenses". I was on his side until I read that bit about his haircut. My haircuts cost €12. Why is he spending so much on his hair? Rather than suing the inauguration committee he should think about finding a new barber. In no time he'll recoup his lost $250.

UCD Banking and Finance

Just curious, but what are they teaching at UCD's Banking & Finance courses these days? The Black-Scholes black hole? Or maybe financial intermediation and its role in destroying the nation. I don't know. Just can't imagine how the lecturers are carrying on teaching this stuff.

And, how many of UCD's Banking & Finance graduates helped lead the banks to destruction? What value is there to the state in subsidizing this sort of education?

The government is looking for cut-backs. I suggest they start by eliminating UCD's banking & finance department. And, just to be fair, they should do the same for every university banking & finance department. No sense in wasting money in a shrinking education budget.

{And, that should probably be the policy for every university in the western world.}

One more thing on Dan Rooney

I forgot to mention yesterday that a couple of weeks ago the Irish Voice reported that Rooney was likely to be the new Ambassador to Ireland.

Maybe if I root for the Steelers Rooney might send me that Thanksgiving invite that always seemed to get overlooked by Ambassador Foley? One can hope.

Rooting for the Rooneys

I've always kind of liked the Pittsburgh Steelers. Back when I was a kid, I couldn't have told you what it was that I liked about them - they weren't my team - but I generally rooted for them against "America's Team" and other more slickly run organizations. The Steelers were gritty, tough and winners.

Today's NY Times has a long feature on the family that has owned the Steelers since their inception. The article has convinced me that what I liked about the Steelers is down to the Rooney family and their values. There's just so much to like there.

And, for those who like to keep tabs on these things, Dan Rooney has done a lot for his ancestral hometown of Newry, Co. Down.

So, I'll be rooting for Pittsburgh to win the Super Bowl on Sunday (although I won't be staying up for it).

Only in Ireland

Typical isn't it. The little guy has to pay taxes and is pursued by the state for those taxes, but the well-connected guy gets to be in charge of the tax collectors despite the fact he "forgot" to pay what he owed a few years back. Where else but Ireland would such a thing happen?

Oh wait, it's not Ireland at all, but America. President Obama's choice of Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner has successfully dodged the fact that he's a tax dodger.

Timothy F. Geithner was sworn in as secretary of the Treasury on Monday evening, confirmed by a Senate majority that concluded that his experience in government and finance outweighed concerns about recent disclosures of some $34,000 in past tax delinquencies.

Geithner claimed it was an innocent mistake, but as the Times spent years working for the Treasury Department before he joined the International Monetary Fund. He knew the laws and if he didn't, he obviously wasn't much of a Treasury Department official.

His confirmation became unexpectedly complicated this month by the disclosure that he failed to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for 2001-4, when he was a senior official at the International Monetary Fund. As an international organization, the I.M.F. does not withhold taxes for American employees, though it does provide statements of their estimated liabilities and pays them an amount equal to the employer share of payroll taxes.

I was in favor of Geithner's appointment when I first heard about it back in November, but I can't believe that he wasn't asked to withdraw when his "innocent mistake" came to light. I do not believe he is so unique that the President couldn't find someone else to run the Treasury Department, even in these difficult times. In fact, I suspect that the difficult times are going to provide greater incentives for people to get 'creative' with their tax returns. And, now, they can argue with the IRS that they "just made an innocent mistake, like your boss".

Honestly, if this had happened in Ireland and Fianna Fail was involved the press would be all over it, jumping up and down, shouting about low standards in high places. This is a bad decision by President Obama.

Obama's first gaffe

I have to admit I missed this one, but when I read it I was kind of surprised that President Obama's speechwriters/editors didn't catch it. During his inaugural address Obama said, "Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath". Well, not quite.

Obama is the 44th President, but for reasons I've never fully understood Grover Cleveland was the 22nd and the 24th President because he served two non-consecutive terms. So only 43 Americans have taken the oath, although 44 Presidents have. Obviously, it's a technical thing, but any list of Presidents will include two listings for Cleveland. It's hardly an obscure fact.

Wilson's mother

According to the Washington Post President Obama is the first son of an immigrant to reach the White House since before the Civil War.

[n]o son of an immigrant has risen to be president since James Buchanan, whose father was born in Ireland in 1761. "This is a completely new phenomenon," said Gary Boyd Roberts, who has spent a lifetime studying the lineage of U.S. presidents and is senior research scholar emeritus with the New England Historic Genealogical Society.

Mr. Roberts may have spent a 'lifetime studying the lineage of U.S. presidents', but when I first heard the Buchanan reference this week something my grandmother once said came back to me. She told me that President Wilson was keen to side with Britain in WWI because his mother was English.

Now my Grandmother rarely forgot something once she read it - and she was always reading. And with Google I've found that I can confirm those sometimes vague memories of things my Grandmother once told me.

So, a little digging on Google and I found this. Wilson's mother was from Carlisle in England and he visited there a few times, including during his 'Pilgrimage of the Heart' tour in 1918. And as I read the account of the visit from the NY Times I got a sense of what an emotional moment it was for Wilson.

So, my grandmother was right about Wilson's mother and, maybe, not all that far wrong about his pro-British leanings before America entered the war.

First, second, third, ..., ???th author-president

I don't buy Garrison Keillor's assertion in today's Irish Times that President Obama is "our first genuine author-president". I might check for other authors & titles later, but I know Jefferson wrote Notes on the State of Virginia, which was published in the 1780s. I was pretty sure Wilson had published a book (or more). Took me all of 1 minute to find this one - Congressional Government, published in 1900. Keillor doesn't know what he's talking about.

And, just because other Presidents may not have had their writings published in book form under their own names hardly means they weren't authors. I mean Jefferson also 'authored' the Declaration of Independence. Madison 'authored' about a third of the Federalist Papers. Adams drafted the Constitution of the State of Massachusetts. And so on.

Look, I can understand being an Obama supporter, being thrilled by his election and even losing the run of yourself because you're so happy. But, is it too much to ask those who publish syndicated columns to try maintain some perspective?

Update Here's another book by an author-president: The Naval War of 1812 by Theodore Roosevelt. I then found this from the NY Times from 1902, which indicates that Roosevelt had written "over a dozen books" before he became President. The Times does say that Roosevelt was "in no sense a professional author", but that was their way of saying that Roosevelt's literary achievements were not masterpieces. The Times does acknowledge that Roosevelt's books were "widely read".

Okay, that's it. No more time wasted on this annoyance.

"It was a different environment"

The Financial Regulator didn't really bother regulating the banks. They regulated themselves. That's what the Financial Regulator said yesterday.

Earlier, the Chairman of the Financial Regulator told the committee that the authority is working to ensure that nothing like the Anglo Irish Bank controversy could happen again.

Jim Farrell said that in hindsight, different action should have been taken but it was a different environment.

He said the previous form of regulation had placed responsibility with banks' boards and senior management but that did not work.

"It was a different environment". Yeah, no kidding. It was an environment of extreme risk-taking and hubris in banking. Throw in incompetence and greed too. That was the environment.

Maybe I'm just being obtuse, but isn't that when you expect the regulator to step in and law down the law? If they won't act then, when it's most needed, why bother with a regulator at all? How much use is it that they're stepping up efforts now when caution is the only game in town and insolvency is a real fear?

You know, I have to add to my last post on the failure of the government and its agents to properly regulate the banks. Yes, the relationship between the bankers and the regulators was too cozy, but I think there's another issue that I overlooked until now. It takes courage to be a financial regulator.

Maybe I'm being unfair, but the weaselly words of Mr. Farrell have me wondering if all we have in the Financial Regulator's office are shy, bookish accountants. Well those people have their place, but at the top of the organization you've gotta have some guts and a bit of aggression. You have got to be able to look the bank chairman in the face and say, "This is wrong. I'm calling in my guys to go through these books with a fine toothed comb and I'm announcing it before the market opens".

That what would have put a halt to the death-defying antics of our banks. Now they've all OD'd on risk and we're all waiting to see which of them will pull through.

Yesterday's Other Speech

I didn't see Brian Cowen deliver his speech marking the 90th anniversary of the first meeting of Dáil Éireann. May be just as well because I can't stand listening to him.

Excepting one or two little quibbles, I think it's a very good speech (the English part - I had to skip the first quarter or so). He does a great job of laying out the case for Ireland's role in the EU and connecting it to the aspirations of those who sat in the 1st Dáil. Like I said it's a very good speech: until he gets to the last bit on our current troubles.

The end of the speech is where he sends us a teaser alerting us to future tax hikes. That's what he means by "solidarity", I'm sure. We're all going to have to pay more in tax as an act of solidarity with those who've lost their jobs.

All this talk of solidarity sounds great, but it wasn't a lack of solidarity that got us into this mess. It was imprudence and incompetence. And, to a great extent it was the government's imprudence - paying almost no heed to the state's obligation to properly regulate the banks - and incompetence - failure to plan for the exchange rate/interest rate crunch we're in now and which was inevitable from the moment we voted 'Yay' to Maaastricht - that allowed the credit crisis to evolve into a crisis of nearly existential proportions for this Republic.

Why should we have faith in Cowen's government when it was he and his party that (essentially) led us into this? Sacrifices have to be made Brian and your career is probably one of them. Call an election and get out of the way.

The Speech

I didn't see the speech live, but watched it late last night.

I'd heard George Hook briefly say he was disappointed about an hour after President Obama had finished speaking. After I'd watched the speech I knew what he was talking about, although I wasn't disappointed.

I was surprised by the speech, but not disappointed. I was expecting an artistic speech full of great optimistic rhetorical flourishes. There was very little of that. The new President was so downbeat it was almost like the burden of the office was already taking its toll.

I understand why George Hook was disappointed. He wasn't just there for the history of the moment, but to be lifted, energized, inspired. He seems to have got none of that and, I thought, based on the reactions, that the crowd was sort of flat after the initial burst of excitement. Maybe it was the cold.

I was sort of heartened, as has happened a few times since Election Day. I liked the pragmatic acknowledgment of the contribution of entrepreneurs and business owners. I had the sense that the focus of his new regulatory and legislative programs will be on making the bankers behave. I didn't get the sense that there was a lot of new anti-business legislation on the way (at least not from the Executive Branch). And, even though I didn't believe him, I liked the bit about how government programs that don't work will be ended.

After the speech I heard some analyst say that he thought the reference to the unclenched fist was directed to Ahmadinejad. Maybe it was, but I was thinking of Mugabe & Castro when I heard those words. Especially Castro.

I thought the Valley Forge reference fell completely flat, maybe because too many of those on the Mall didn't know their country's history. I don't know, but I liked the tip of the cap to the Indispenable Man.

I'm not sure why he felt the need for the somber tone, but it didn't bother me.

{Now I want to read others' reactions.}

09

It's the 21st of January and I haven't seen a single 09 car yet. I know I'm not on the roads all day, but still I can't believe I haven't seen a single one.

Good Luck President Obama

It's only few minutes to the inauguration and still it's dark and miserable here. I was sure His Obamaness was going to change all that so that Ireland could be the new Santa Barbara. Did not the people of Ireland prove worthy supplicants? Oh the anguish that we should not find favor.

And the young Americans too. Are they cold today? From what I understand every kid who ever owned a cabbage patch doll is on the streets of Washington at this moment. {There was something mind-controlling about that toy and it's evident today more than ever.} Did they too prove unworthy of him?

Okay, okay. I know that there are a lot of people whose views are similar to mine who are mocking the hype surrounding the new President. I can't say I'm excited, but this is always an interesting day. Maybe not as interesting as when Jefferson took over from Adams - peaceful transfer of power from one party to the other - or when Lincoln took over just 5 weeks before the Confederates opened up on Fort Sumter, but nonetheless the ceremony is good viewing and the change today is worthy of a large audience.

I wish him well, especially as long as he does what I want done! Good luck President Obama.

Should the Boss retire?

If a tree falls in the woods and you're a middle-aged man wearing ear muffs inside a large house, will you hear the noise?

You can listen to Bruce Springsteen's new album here.

I listened to Bruce's new album and my oh my is it boring. I know I was down on Magic, but this one's worse. There are at least 5 very dull songs on the album: My Lucky Day, What Love Can Do, Tomorrow Never Knows, Kingdom Of Days, & Surprise Surprise. This Life Is is worse than bland. I think it's supposed to be meaningful, but it's vaguely nothing.

No song on this album is as good Devil's Arcade from the last. The Wrestler is the best offering here, but I sort of didn't mind: Outlaw Pete, Working on a Dream, Queen of the Supermarket, Life Itself (got the free download) & The Last Carnival.

America's still involved in wars in the Middle East & central Asia, but that doesn't seem to have inspired Bruce. The world's economy is falling apart, but that doesn't seem to have inspired Bruce. There's a young man taking over in Washington (for whom Bruce campaigned) and that doesn't seem to have inspired Bruce. It's as if he's just too married, too middle-aged, too contented to write great songs these days.

What would you do if you're on a plane that's about to crash?

I like how this NY Times article starts.

Some passengers screamed, others tucked their heads between their knees, and several prayed over and over, "Lord, forgive me for my sins." But a man named Josh who was sitting in the exit row did exactly what everyone is supposed to but few ever do: He pulled out the safety card and read the instructions on how to open the exit door.

… Then Josh stood up. "Someone tried to pull the door in," another passenger recalled, "and he said, 'No, you've got to throw it out.' He twisted it and threw it out.'"

Here's this guy who must have wondered if he was living his last moments, but instead of being pessimistic he grabs the safety card and starts reading. It's a great image.

Closing Guantanamo - within the first Four Years

I wonder how Europeans will interpret this:

In a wide-ranging 70-minute interview with Washington Post reporters and editors, the president-elect pledged quick action on the Middle East once he takes office, promised to support voting rights for D.C. residents, and said he will consider it a failure if he has not closed the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by the end of his first term in office.

There are people around these parts who are expecting Guantanamo will be closed by Tuesday evening.

The Mets' new home

I can't stop laughing after reading my favorite Mets blog today. Shea Stadium is gone and the Mets' new home will (still?) be called CitiField. Citi with an 'i' because it's sponsored by Citibank. You know, yeah, that Citibank.

Anyway, Steve over at The Eddie Kranepool Society has been calling the new stadium Bailout Park for a few months. But today, I see he's renamed it Paupers Field, which is an all too realistic acknowledgment of the deterioration in Citibank's position since the fall.

"Social Inclusion Consultant"

The Limerick Southside & Northside Regeneration Agencies are seeking bids (not sure the link will work for everyone) from interested parties to be included on a "Panel for Social Inclusion Consultants". In order to be considered for the panel the potential panelist must (a) have a tax clearance certificate {fair enough} and (b) "provide evidence of turnover of €50,000 in the last financial year".

Pardon? Come again? In order to be a "Social Inclusion Consultant" you have to be grossing €50K? Isn't that a bit, I don't know, exclusive?

We need new leadership

A year ago we still harbored hopes that the economy would come down gradually and not-too-painfully; that we'd get a 'soft landing'. Well, that now seems out of reach. Who do we need to help us now.

Well, someone with a background is this sort of thing. An expert. Perhaps someone who is Visiting Scholar at Berkeley's Center for Catastrophic Risk Management? Someone with a bit of experience of keeping calm, keeping cool and properly managing crashes.

Chesley B. Sullenburger III for Taoiseach.

Crisis of Governance

I was listening to Joe Higgins on Pat Kenny's show this morning. The discussion was about Anglo-Irish Bank and Joe said that this was a Crisis of Capitalism.

Now, Joe's not alone putting this idea about. Yet, the problems at Anglo-Irish and to a lesser extent (so far) at the other banks actually say more about the ability of the state to do its job than it says about the people in charge of the banks. What has the current crisis told us about the people running banks? Well, some of them are incredibly greedy and some of them are incredibly inept and in many cases the two groups overlap.

Okay, maybe it's a bit of a revelation that so many of the people in charge of the banks are inept, but that many are greedy can hardly be an eye-opener for anyone. But, still, the primary revelation is that the state and its agents are incapable of providing the oversight that we as taxpayers, bank customers and investors assumed they were providing. The real crisis is in governance, not in capitalism.

The failure of the state to ensure that our banks were were not taking excessive risks and were operating transparently calls into question the very idea that Ireland can be an independent state with regards to banking and finance. Why this should be so is, I believe, due to the fact that Ireland is just too small.

Ireland is too small to find the people who are willing to get in the faces and ask the hard, searching questions of those who run the banks, to undertake the kind of audit that would uncover both unethical loans to chairmen & directors, but also have the nerve and the authority to lay down the law when they see that a bank is taking excessive risks.

Is Ireland too small to find sufficiently capable people to oversee our banks and financial services industry? Well, maybe it is, but I think there's more to it than that. Ireland is too small in that there are too many links between the people who run the banks and those who are responsible for overseeing the banks.

Some of what I'm getting at was mentioned by Michael Casey before Christmas.

Close relationships between regulators and banks - difficult to avoid in a small country - will have to be ended. It is not being suggested here that the Irish system suffers from "regulatory capture", but the long-standing practice of former governors and senior regulators joining the boards of banks on their retirement should be stopped.

But, it's more than that. This is a small country and seeing as the banks and regulators are all based in Dublin, it's even smaller. The bankers may play golf where the regulators play golf, they may have shared friendships, their spouses may know one another, their children may attend the same schools, play in the same rugby clubs, etc. That makes it more difficult for a regulator to come down hard on a banker if it's going to cause tension in the home life. It's just too small, too cozy here.

So, what's to be done? Well, there are two options to try to get around this problem. One, outsource our regulation. Just give up the very idea that we should have our own banks and our own banking oversight. I've often heard that people from abroad wouldn't understand the Irish market the way the locals do, but based on what we're experiencing now that might not be a bad thing.

But, if we must maintain our own banks and regulations, at the very least the central bank and financial regulator need to be moved. They should be sent to Sligo (or wherever) so that the potential for family life inconvenience is mitigated. The regulators can do their job just as well from outside Dublin as they can from here. Move them all, lock, stock & barrel to Sligo or Tralee or wherever it's distant enough so that there's less chance for an overlap among family and friends. We need regulators who are not afraid to regulate.

I bought a few shares of Anglo last night

No, not on the market, but as a taxpayer. The Brians decided that I (& the rest of you suckers taxpayers) would like to own a piece of Anglo-Irish bank.

I'm pretty sure I heard Joan Burton this morning insist that the government tell us the names of those who owe the bank. That sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Now that we own the bank surely we should be told the gory details. I'm assuming that those who executed the transaction on our behalf already know the details, but I see no reason for them to keep it a secret. Let's have the names of those who owe large sums to Anglo-Irish. What harm can it do? And, it's not prurient for us to want to know who owes us money. I would never lend money to someone without at least getting their name first. So, who owes me (all of us)?

More support for Israel?

This article from the Christian Science Monitor is a week old, but even allowing for the passing of 7 days the thrust of this article caused me to do a double take. Basically Europe is less pro-Palestinian now than it was previously.

"There is a general 'Arab fatigue' in Europe," says Denis Bauchard, an adviser to the French Institute for International Relations in Paris. "The Palestine issue continues, the violence continues, the Palestinians are divided, and it just creates a kind of fatigue."

"Europe fears an Islamist threat, whether internal or external, and this has begun to change the overall views on the Israel-Palestine conflict," says Aude Signoles, an expert on Palestinian movements at the University of La Réunion in Madagascar.

The article is more about general trends and cites the Pew polls in France & Germany as evidence. I wonder if what's happening in Gaza will have any long term impact on these trends.

As for Ireland, even prior to the recent military actions in Gaza I hadn't sensed any change in attitudes here with regards to the Israelis & Palestinians. And, based on what I hear and read here I think it's pretty likely that anti-Israel attitudes have hardened here since the end of December.

I guess I have to row back

Today's Irish Times seems to have no anti-Israel column and, in fact, has one that is outright supportive of Israel. A second column by Irshad Manji is not so much pro-Israeli as anti-Hamas.

Then there's Tom Clonan's analysis on the behavior of both the IDF and Hamas. I have to admit that I often find Clonan annoying, but that's because I generally have no answer to some of the the things he writes that make me uncomfortable.

For example:

It appears that the IDF is using the full spectrum of its conventional combat capabilities indiscriminately. Under the terms of the Geneva Conventions, the use of such weapons systems in this manner among civilian population centres is interpreted as "indiscriminate". In other words, the IDF can legitimately be accused of "wanton destruction" and "wilful killing" within Gaza.

Specifically, IDF attacks in recent days are in direct contravention of protocol one, article 51, sections four and 5a of the Geneva Conventions. They prohibit the use of weapons systems, or a "method of attack that cannot be directed at or limited to a specific military objective" or "where there is a concentration of civilians or civilian objects".

The Geneva Conventions proscribe such attacks in urban environments where civilians reside and state that, when an attack "could cause incidental loss of civilian life or damage to civilian objects, then the attack must be called off".

Given the ongoing loss of civilian life in Gaza, the IDF and Israeli government would appear to be legally bound to heed immediately the UN Security Council resolution requirement to halt the offensive.

I've often wondered if the Geneva Conventions have any real application against an enemy that will deliberately endanger his own children – "Hamas has also been shown to be launching rockets from the environs of schools, mosques and other civilian locales" – but such actions make me uncomfortable, as I said.

How much easier it is to live in Ireland rather than Israel.

Must take Hamas seriously

Jeffrey Goldberg's column in today's NY Times is tremendous. Goldberg argues that Israel cannot make peace with Hamas.

Periodically, advocates of negotiation suggest that the hostility toward Jews expressed by Hamas is somehow mutable. But in years of listening, I haven't heard much to suggest that its anti-Semitism is insincere. Like Hezbollah, Hamas believes that God is opposed to a Jewish state in Palestine. Both groups are rhetorically pitiless, though, again, Hamas sometimes appears to follow the lead of Hezbollah.

… I asked him the question I always ask of Hamas leaders: Could you agree to anything more than a tactical cease-fire with Israel? I felt slightly ridiculous asking: A man who believes that God every now and again transforms Jews into pigs and apes might not be the most obvious candidate for peace talks at Camp David. Mr. Rayyan answered the question as I thought he would, saying that a long-term cease-fire would be unnecessary, because it will not take long for the forces of Islam to eradicate Israel.

I heard a spokesman for the Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign on the radio yesterday dismiss the very notion that Hamas was committed to the destruction of Israel. I was dying to ask him what evidence he had that Hamas is not committed to that goal? Jeffrey Goldberg has at least gone in search of such evidence and not found it.

Goldberg sums up the difficulty of Israel's position.

There is a fixed idea among some Israeli leaders that Hamas can be bombed into moderation. This is a false and dangerous notion. It is true that Hamas can be deterred militarily for a time, but tanks cannot defeat deeply felt belief.

The reverse is also true: Hamas cannot be cajoled into moderation. Neither position credits Hamas with sincerity, or seriousness.

Vincent Browne - channeling Ahmadinejad

This may be an exaggeration, but basically there's a column a day damning Israel in the Irish Times. Today's is by Vincent Browne, who starts out negative but eventually gets to the nub of his problem with Israel: it shouldn't exist in the first place.

The UN's role in the Palestinian/Israeli conflict has been inglorious from the outset.

Indeed, it was the UN that played a large part in igniting the conflict at the outset by calling for the partition of Palestine and the creation of Jewish and Arab states, without any regard to the wishes of the people of Palestine.

At the time, Arabs constituted more than two-thirds of the population of 1.78 million.

The state of Israel was declared on May 14th, 1948. There followed a war, during which 700,000 Arabs were driven or fled from their homes.

More than three-quarters of the territory of Palestine was incorporated into the new state of Israel.

The international community was guilt-ridden by the then recent revelation of the Holocaust and its appreciation of its complicity in the pogroms against Jews over the centuries. The infliction of another historic injustice, this time on the Palestinian Arabs, was the means whereby that guilt was idly assuaged.

That monstrous injustice lies at the heart of the conflict in the Middle East since then.

The refusal of the international community to acknowledge the origins of the state of Israel is the obstacle to a resolution of the conflict.

A large proportion of the 1.7 million people trapped and besieged in Gaza are refugees or descendants of refugees from 1948. Is it any wonder Hamas refuses to recognise the state of Israel? Is it any wonder many Palestinians and others in the Middle East are committed to the destruction of a state that was founded on such wrongs?

If you don't believe Israel has a right to exist in the first place then that's that. No point discussing Israel's 'right' to self defense and how they should exercise that right.

I can't claim to be an expert on the founding of Israel, but I believe Israel has a right to exist. I remember reading this years ago and thought it sounded reasonable on Israel's right to exist. Fr. Flannery makes his case better than Browne makes his.

You want to read something that'll put a chill up your spine?

Read David McWilliams's column this morning.

When this borrowing splurge stopped abruptly last year because the credit markets shut down, the Government was faced with the choice: does it allow the banks to collapse because they were so borrowed that they couldn't finance themselves or does it guarantee the banks, buy time and see whether it can put a plan B in place? Had the Government allowed banks to go bust in October, there would have been a run on the other banks, leading to a collapse of the system and we would have been "Iceland inside the euro".

But amazingly it didn't put plan B into action, it never came up with a plan B and now the banks are again in dire straits. Although the guarantee means that they might not default, their delinquency has contaminated the sovereign debt and now the market thinks that the banks will bring the State down with them.

Consider the position of Anglo. If Anglo goes bust, because people withdraw their deposits, the State will have to write a large cheque. That cheque could be as big as €30bn if the assets in the bank's balance sheet are as bad as many fear. Will Ireland be able to write this cheque? Will we be able, at short notice, to borrow that much cash?

He then looks back to the mid-70s when the Federal Government bailed out New York City (although Ford never did tell the city to "drop dead").

To avoid a similar situation threatening the euro, the Commission imposed the 3pc budget deficit rule on all euro countries so that no country could undermine the currency. What would happen if we were to test this? Would the EU bail us out rather than countenance a sovereign default that might destabilise the euro? Could we renegotiate Lisbon along such lines? Could we go to the ECB and look for a bailout?

I love the way he tosses in Lisbon. Although the situation is very serious, it is kind of amusing to consider that we may need our European partners to bail us out after voting no to the Lisbon Treaty. I think the re-run of Lisbon will be an offer we can't refuse.

Blaming Britain

Britain is one of our partners in the European Union. They opted to remain outside the euro. Why? Precisely because they wanted to remain in control of their currency. Ireland opted to join the euro? Why? Because we were too small to have an independent currency and joining with the Germans & French would provide low interest rates and stability.

Well we've got the stability that we wanted. While the American dollar and British pound have been tanking our currency has been holding fairly steady, which means it's been increasing in value against those other two. So, why exactly is Brian Lenihan berating the British when we've got what we wanted?

The pound's losses came as Brian Lenihan, the Irish finance minister, accused the UK authorities of, in effect, devaluing the pound by expanding the UK money supply, action that was causing "immense difficulties" in the Irish economy. "It is a question for all of us in the EU as to the extent to which a competitive devaluation can be used as any kind of weapon," he said.

I honestly cannot believe that there is someone running the Department for Finance, a member of the party that was in power when Maastricht was approved, who didn't realize that this situation was inevitable from the moment we joined the euro and Britain didn't.

Honestly, it's embarrassing. Please Minister, shut up or go.

Pay cuts

One reason I believed that being part of the euro is such a problem is because I never believed that workers would accept pay cuts. Pay cuts - for both private and public sector employees - are the only real mechanism available to us to try to regain competitiveness, particularly with regards to the UK. If the public and private sector workers - unionized or not - are willing to accept significant pay cuts, say back to 2006 levels, then I think we can survive membership in the euro.

Toll bridge nonsense

I've driven over the M50 bridge late at night a few times recently. If someone isn't already aware that there is a toll bridge there I think it would be pretty easy for them to be unaware that they owed anything for the trip. Sure there are signs, but when it's very late and it's raining who's reading such wordy signs.

There's no flashing light to alert you to the fact that you're about to incur a cost and there's no flash from the equipment when you pass under the camera that records your trip. I bet a lot of visitors to Dublin will be surprised to learn that they've incurred a €3 charge for their journey around the M50. (And, I'm still not clear how the state plans to make visitors from outside this state pay.)

Oh yeah, and I registered with eFlow. What a joke.

They send out a letter saying you must call to activate your account, although you can use your account before it's "active". I have to provide my unique code over the phone - can't do it online - to activate my account.

So, I call. After making me go through the automated answering service, based on my last response to their "If you want to … press button …" there should be no doubt that I want to activate my account. Okay, I can live with this hassle.

But, the guy who answers the phone can't activate my account because "his system is being uploaded". So, why is he answering my call when I've already indicated that I want to activate my account? No good reason. Anyway, someone will call me back "shortly".

Four days and a follow-up e-mail later I call again. Same automated system. Finally a human being. "My account number? Sure, it's ########". "That can't be right, it's too short for one of our account numbers". "I can't help you there - I'm reading it right off your letter".

Eventually we both learn that the account number I've provided is not, in fact, too short, but is correct. Now to activate. "There was no need for you to call, your account was activated a few days ago". "What? What about all this nonsense about me providing my unique code or whatever? Never mind, good-bye".

"Free Palestine"

I was in London on Saturday. My son & I spent a few hours at the Science Museum and found ourselves mingling with a lot of protesters on the train when the day was done. The protesters were returning from an anti-Israel/pro-Palestinian rally near to the Science Museum.

The train was packed and I found myself standing very near to a woman who'd been at the protest. She was about my age and she looked like she was comfortable enough materially. She was fairly well dressed and on her lapel she was wearing two buttons. One said "Stop Israel's War" (or something to that effect) and the other said "Free Palestine".

Now 'Stop the War' is a position I can understand even if I have a less definite opinion as to what's going on. However, I was dying to ask the woman what was the message of the "Free Palestine" button. To me that sounds awfully like something that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would say. I really wanted to ask her if she too believed that Israel should be "wiped off the map", but I didn't want to start something because I had my son with me. It bothered me all the way home, though.

Why God invented Florida

There's a very good reason why Walt Disney decided to open his first big amusement park near Los Angeles and his even bigger second park near Orlando. He didn't choose a flat area just outside Chicago for one very good reason and I learned what that was the past few days.

We were in Disneyland Paris and my Lord was it cold. Let me tell you, wind blown snow can really burn the eyes when you're twirling above the Earth in an open Dumbo. That was Monday's lesson. Yesterday I discovered that waiting in line to see Donald when the temperature is in the mid 20's (-4°C was the high) with a strong breeze can be fairly sobering, although, strangely, not for those under 10.

The magic of Disney is something the Disney people like to emphasize constantly, but there must be something to it based on the fact that somehow human beings under the age of 10 or so are immune to the elements when in the Disney parks. There seemed to be nothing but smiles on the frozen faces while the adults all looked like cartoon characters who'd just stepped out of an ice box.

The only saving grace of the January Disneyland Paris experience was that 20 yards outside the Park gates there was a little hut selling fairly large cups of vin chaud. And, at €4, I considered them excellent value.

Dr. John Pryor

Flags across New York State will fly at half staff on Monday in honor of Major John Pryor. Pryor, who was 42, was killed in Iraq last week.

I didn't know John Pryor, but he grew up in the same town and graduated from the same high school as me.

Major Pryor was a doctor, a trauma/critical-care surgeon at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania; he joined the Army Reserve Medical Corps shortly after September 11, which is how he came to be in Iraq last week.

From everything I've read, Dr. John Pryor was an amazing guy. In addition to his responsibilities at the hospital and with the Army, Pryor was chief medical adviser to the Red Cross in his area and "often had spent hours teaching Red Cross volunteers how to handle traumas".

Quite a loss.

The things you learn ...

I made two interesting discoveries over Christmas.

First. I hadn't heard of Dialwise until New Year's Eve. I have no idea how long they've been around, but that I can call America (or Canada or Taiwan or just about anywhere) for the price of a local call using my house phone was big news to me. I don't understand how Dialwise makes any money out of this and I haven't seen my phone bill yet, but I did try out the service yesterday and it works just fine. Quality and ease of connection were unchanged as far as I could tell.

Second. Now, I would never do this myself because I'm sure it's dodgy from a legal perspective, but the fact that every DVD player has a "secret" menu where you can change your player's region code was unknown to me. I overheard two guys talking about this on the train and (it seems) you can change your DVD player and allow it to play movies bought in America (or anywhere else) as well as those you buy locally. All you have to do (apparently) is google your DVD player and the "secret" menu will be revealed.

Maybe everyone already knows this, but I found it interesting, although merely in academic sort of way.

Time to get back at it

Uhhhh. Sorry. Just shaking off the cobwebs. I've hardly read a newspaper in a week, barely even saw 20 minutes of televised news. So, not much to offer on the big doings of the day (or week) - yet.

Losing our competitive edge

Economists Anthony Leddin and Brendan Walsh explain why being in the Euro is such a problem for us and advise potential applicants - Iceland, Poland, Denmark, etc. - to have a good look at Ireland before making the leap.

Between 2000 and 2003, the Irish economy suffered a 30 per cent loss in price competitiveness relative to all our trading partners taking both exchange rates and relative inflation into account. This loss of price competitiveness hurt domestic export and import-competing firms, leading to a fall in the growth rate and inflation but placing the economy closer to a sustainable trajectory.

An independent Central Bank of Ireland would undoubtedly have started the adjustment process earlier - raising interest rates as inflation rose and unemployment fell. But, as a member of the European System of Central Banks, the Irish authorities were limited to sounding unheeded warnings in the Quarterly Bulletin.

… Contrary to what was required under Irish conditions, the ECB cut interest rates from 4.75 per cent to 2 per cent between 2001 and 2003. Given the high Irish inflation, the result was negative real interest rates which added fuel to the already unsustainable boom.

… Following two years at a sustainable growth rate in 2001/02, the economy again picked up and the real growth rate averaged 5.3 per cent per annum between 2003 and 2007. Unemployment averaged 4.5 per cent and another 290,000 net new jobs were created. But inflation remained well above the EMU average and price competitiveness continued to deteriorate.

They don't argue that we should leave the Euro, but an obvious sub-text here is that we probably shouldn't have joined in the first place.

Adestes Fideles

May not be about what you think it's about.

Thanks Dave

A friend of mine sent me a present. A hat. Not just a hat, but a hat with the symbol of the #7 subway line on it. The 7 train is the Flushing line, the train to Shea Stadium Citi Field (sigh). It's also the first line I was ever on - we lived along the 7 line when I was a little kid.

And, unfortunately, I've recently been noticing the cold on my head a bit more than in years past. The once-thick-thatch on the top of my head is not providing the warmth it did in years past. So my new hat is perfect.

Where were you in 1500?

The Irish sure have scattered. Of the descendants of people living in Ireland in 1500 only 12% are in Ireland today. 76% are in America.

Using the McEvedy and Jones (1976) estimates of populations in 1500, the Penn World Tables 6.2 population estimates for 2000, and the matrix’s estimates of origins, we find that there were 31.6 million descendants of the Irish population of 1500 alive in 2000, with less than 12% of these living in Ireland, 76% in the US, 5% in Australia, and so on. In contrast, the vast majority, although not all, of the descendants of China’s year 1500 inhabitants live today in China.

Not earth-shattering, but kind of interesting.

Can we take the euro-pain?

It seems like a lifetime ago, but it was only in January when Matt Cooper was asking the question: 'Is it time to leave the euro'?

I've always thought the decision to join the euro was wrong. Why? Well, it was all due to an economics lecture I attended in 1992. The topic was the currency. According to the lecturer (can't remember his name right now) being part of the single currency or not was not a major issue, but it would be catastrophic if we joined and Britain didn't. Well, looks like he knew what he was talking about.

I was reminded of all this last night watching George Lee's report on the news last night. He never mentioned the possibility of leaving the euro, but anyone listening to him had to have that question somewhere in their head? Can we endure the pain that being part of the euro is causing?

I've mentioned this to a couple of people and they all come back with references to Iceland. And, yes, Iceland is a scary example. Okay. How 'bout this? It makes more sense for us to have a single currency with the UK than with the rest of the Eurozone? That's almost heresy, I know, and bordering on a topic I never touch here, but really we'd better off with Sterling than with the Euro. Our economy more closely matches Britain's than Germany's, France's or Italy's. We can rejoin the euro when (if) the UK joins.

We should rerun two EU Treaty referendums next year: Lisbon & Maastricht. A 'Yes' to Lisbon and 'No' to Maastricht might set things right.

We're too small ...

That's the gist of Ivan Yates's column this morning. Too small for anyone in the EU to really take our complaints with Lisbon seriously. Just too small.

While they respect our sovereignty and right to self-determination, this has not extended to allowing one of the smallest and most peripheral states to dictate to the rest of Europe how EU procedures should be reformed.

They are not prepared to reopen the ratification process of the treaty within their own respective states. They are unwilling to revisit their parliaments or electorates with an additional protocol — let alone alter the treaty. Some may argue that our Government didn't try hard enough. Whether this is true or not, it is wholly irrelevant because we now have to face the collective reality of "no renegotiation".

I admire that honesty and believe there's a lot of truth in it. Look, the pro-EU forces in Brussels and in the various EU capitals were more than happy to engage in a bit of trickery - basically changing the title on the EU Constitution - to override the French & Dutch 'No' votes in 2005. That they'd have little patience with us is hardly news.

At least Yates is willing to admit the full truth; many on the 'Yes' side are not. We have no say. Not really. Not in how the rules are made. All we get to decide is whether we agree with the new rules whenever they're changed or we can leave. That's it.

Yates continues his pro-Lison argument saying that these treaty referendums are not the place to take out your frustrations on the government. That's true.

A constant characteristic in the vox pops of no voters was a "whatever you're having yourself" disenchantment. If you were fed up due to the smoking ban, drink driving rules, economic recession, Dustin's Eurovision defeat, fishing and farming woes, taxation system, health cuts or tribunal revelations — you found the referendum a suitable repository for your angst.

However, he's wrong about fishing & farming woes. Those two industries can obviously point to EU rules and regulations as having an impact on their profitability. That means those who are interested in farming and/or fishing are right to take an interest in the Lisbon Treaty and to make a case for or against.

I also believe that someone who is opposed to taxation laws being changed to mirror those in France or Germany can be at least concerned about the increasing centralization of power in Brussels. It defies belief that we can keep integrating - not just our economies, but almost all aspects of governing - without some equalization* in the tax laws. And, as Yates notes, when the big boys decide the time has come for forcing the tax laws to be essentially consistent throughout the EU, again, we'll have little say in how those new rules are written. We can agree or we can leave.

* Equalization is not the word I was looking for, but it didn't come to me.

Highest turnout since 1968? Maybe.

Today's NY Times says that with all districts reporting "61.6 percent of Americans eligible to vote went to the polls this year, the highest since Richard M. Nixon beat Hubert H. Humphrey in the close 1968 race". This year's turnout was a bit better than in 2004, when turnout was 60.1%. Okay, but ...

In 2004 the total ballot was around 122.3m and this year it was 125.2m. What I find interesting is that with those vote totals that means the base population was the same in both instances - 203m. That means that turnout is (probably) based on the census of 2000. That makes no sense to me seeing as the population changes over the years after the census. That means you can only really compare turnout between elections in years ending with the same digit. {E.g. 2008 with 1988 and 1968, 2004 with 1984, 1964, etc.}

I stand by my belief that turnout was not really greater this year than in 2004.

RTE & the Irish Times on Ganley

I finally watched the Primetime report on Declan Ganley* last night. I was actually expecting it to be much worse. Maybe an Irish viewer would have been more alarmed by Ganley's American colleagues? I don't know, but I found them to be likable guys. I thought they were straight shooters too.

Sure, some of Ganley's 1990s dealings in E. Europe might be a bit shady (maybe), but I wonder how many businesses dealing in the former Soviet states just after the fall of The Wall were any different? Even big companies operating there were probably engaging in 'local customs' when it came to some business dealings. Overall, despite the sinister music and tone I actually thought the criticisms were mostly pretty thin and those who defended Ganley were credible.

Funny enough, after I watched the interview I picked up last Saturday's Irish Times where I found this column by Noel Whelan. Whelan has a go at Ganley too and, to be honest, I think his criticisms may be closer to the truth. Whelan's argument is that Ganley is simply on an ego trip and the "he's sinister" stuff is a distraction. Could be right that Ganley's on an ego trip. But what harm?

* I'm not sure if the videolink to the report will work outside Ireland.

Mets in peace

For that special Met fan in your life, the gift of a (after)lifetime.

The "Best" has come and gone

Marc Coleman writes for the Sunday Independent and is the Economics Editor (I think) at Newstalk. Anyway, for reasons I can't explain I have something of a soft spot for Coleman. Maybe it's pity? I don't know, but if I didn't have this 'soft spot' I'm sure I'd make sport of him frequently. Recently he's been saying the economy's in bad shape, etc., but he was pretty late to that game. When other economists - George Lee & David McWilliams to name two - were warning us that things were starting to unravel, Coleman was still talking things up regularly. He released his book - The Best Is Yet To Come - at the end of 2007.

Why do I bring this up? Only because I read this article from The Spectator and the essence of what it says seems frighteningly possible to me. Jonathan Ruffer's column could have been titled, "The Worst Is Yet To Come".

The Americans allowed a depression to develop in the 1930s because they were afraid of the consequences of losing the principles of sound money. In an effort to avoid a re-run of the 1930s, the Western world is imposing the opposite, equally unbalanced and intemperate solution. We might thereby avoid a depression — but the bad stuff which follows currency compromise will crash down upon us with great vigour. This is the one and only one, and probably last, shock that the credit crunch has yet to impose on a still unsuspecting world.

Roy Keane — "Enraged by the jejune"

Only the New York Times. Even its blog wants to sound a cut above. I'll admit I enjoyed John Doyle's blog/column from the Times's web site, but really? Jejune?

The gist of what Doyle had to say is that Keane's rise and fall exactly mirrored the Irish nation's fortunes.

Uncannily, just as Ireland lurched from Tiger economy to stark recession, seemingly with nothing saved, nothing learned, Keane spent too much and gazed at a shambles of his own making, before he just resigned and walked away. Now, the economic bubble has burst in Ireland and Keane seems fallible.

At that, every Irish person is unnerved. Everyone projects dreams and meaning into the celebrities and sports stars we admire. But with Keane it was even more profound - an entire country obsessed about him and a nation’s psyche, all its pride and enterprise, seemed to reside in him. He is us. We are him. As he goes, so do we. The Celtic Tiger is tamed.

The Land of Lincoln

Illinois is a place apart when it comes to politics. According to Kathleen Parker, "[t]hree of the past eight governors have spent time in jail or prison". Current Governor Blagojevich is bidding to make it 50%.

Still, I kind of find it reassuring. The charges against Blago are so old-school. And, although the language might be a bit salty, I doubt his words would have been out of place coming out of the mouths of many of the old Tammany Hall Mayors. Yes, reassuring.

Why did I throw away my ham?

We hit the panic button yesterday. And, by we, I mean everyone living in Ireland. We were told to throw away all our Irish pork products and we did. We did this even though we were reassured that there was no real health scare risk in having eaten potentially contaminated pork/ham/etc. We were advised to throw away all such products bought since September 1.

When I first heard this I almost thought it was a joke. I mean, how much pig meat have I already eaten since September 1? Loads, but don't worry because there's little health risk. So, why do I have to throw away the ham and pork chops that are still in my fridge? Surely if there's little to worry about after 3 months of eating the stuff, one or two more portions are hardly going to matter. Right? Or not?

This has been bothering me for the past 24 hours. Finally, I think I understand. This drastic measure has virtually nothing to do with the consumers' health and all to do with the pig meat industry. The dire warnings to convince us to dispose of (almost) perfectly good meat - unless we're being lied to about the risks - were to reassure us that when we return to the supermarket or butcher that the pork or ham we buy is 100% top of the line, nothing to be concerned about.

I didn't come to this revelation by myself. I had to be practically hit over the head by Dr. Patrick Wall, formerly of the Irish Food Safety Authority and former Chairman of the European Food Safety Authority. Dr. Wall was on Liveline and he first laid out the case for how low the risk to consumers is and then explained why the meat had to be recalled.

The government basically was afraid repeating Belgium's 1999 chicken problem. In that case the Belgian government played the whole thing down and waited a long time to reveal what it knew, feeding the fear when the story first broke. Their poultry industry was badly hit.

The Irish government was determined not to duplicate that experience. Ireland is a big exporter of food, which makes this sort of scare even more damaging potentially. So, they hit the nuclear button. I don't know why they couldn't explain that the food was contaminated, but could be safely eaten if you really wanted to. Instead, we were all encouraged to throw €10, €20, €30 worth of food away. And, throwing food away drives me nuts. I could have eaten those last few slices of ham.

The Barmaid and the Minister

Hmm. These are different times. A barmaid and the Belgian Minister for Defense, Pieter De Crem, are caught up in a scandal, but it's not what you might think. No, the scandal is that the barmaid was fired for blogging about the Minister's boisterous behavior in the New York restaurant where she worked.

Look, the restaurant owner is perfectly within his rights to fire this woman. And, if I owned a restaurant or bar I'd like to think that my customers would at least be safe from the employees blabbling about what went on. Other patrons? Well, that can't be helped.

At the same time, I can't read Flemish, but her post seems innocent enough. Considering the Minister was in New York he should be happy enough that the Cindy Adams wasn't in the same place or it would have been a much bigger deal for him. So, although I can understand (maybe) why the restaurant owner fired this woman, Mr. de Crem (the crumb?) has gotta get real.

Mr de Crem went on threaten legal action against bloggers and warned Belgian MPs "every one of you is a potential victim".

"I want to take this opportunity and use this non-event to signal a dangerous phenomenon in our society," said during a debate last Friday.

"We live in a time where everybody is free to publish whatever he or she wants on blogs at will without taking any responsibility. This exceeds mud-slinging. I find that it's nearly impossible to defend yourself against this."

Come on! How precious is he? He's a government minister for God's sake and he's moaning because he was caught having too much fun (a problem for the Flemish?). What he did was hardly a big issue, but he turned it into a big issue. Why he couldn't have just said that he might have let his hair down a little too much while in New York is beyond me. He's an uptight so and so who doesn't like the fact he was spotted behaving this way.

And blogging has nothing to do with it, really. In the past the barmaid might have passed this tidbit onto a gossip columnist, but nowadays everyone does their own reporting.

Fly Pottersville Air

It's Christmas time and Michael O'Leary is making another bid for Aer Lingus. Ever notice how much O'Leary's portrayal in the press makes him seem like Mr. Potter from It's A Wonderful Life? Aer Lingus is the Bailey Building & Loan. Only the truth is it's O'Leary who's serving the "rabble", flying people around for next to nothing, which is something the press seems incapable of accepting.