May 30, 2013

New baby boom means we've got to get our act together

Posted in Behavioural Economics · 51 comments ·

My children were born in Belfast. At the first pre-natal class, I was the only dad in the maternity ward in deepest east Belfast not in a Rangers tracksuit. Apart from that, the whole process was quite normal, apart from the “born-again” midwife whose obsession with “saved” people seemed a bit inappropriate when our daughter was only a matter of minutes old.

Amazingly, our daughter was the only child born in the Dundonald hospital that night. This was, according to the nurses and midwives, highly unusual.

The absence of newborns in East Belfast that night may give those nationalists who believe that they will “outbreed” the unionists some comfort. It also reveals quite how significant is the operational achievement of Holles Street in Dublin. Every year 10,000 babies are born in Holles Street, that’s 28 babies per day. This is extraordinary when you think that some of the hospital’s facilities date back to the mid-1700s.

I am writing this piece in a cafe just opposite Holles Street and the traffic of new mothers, nervous fathers, proud grannies and confused siblings is endless. This is the make-up of our lives and it shows you that even when the economy is stumbling, life goes on and it does so vibrantly. We still fall in love. We still have children and we still worry about their first day in school and agonise over why they don’t seem to be doing a jot of work when their exams are next week.

With the cycle of life in mind, it’s wonderful news that at last a new maternity hospital is being built in St Vincent’s, little over a mile away from where I am writing.

A figure of €150m has been earmarked for the project, with the aim of starting construction in 2016 and opening the doors to a new generation in 2018.

The question that the last census raises is what that new generation will look like.

As if to prove that a faltering economy doesn’t stop the great world from revolving, Ireland is, despite the ruined local economy, experiencing a massive baby boom. Last year there were more babies born than any year since 1980 – the year after the Pope visited Ireland, when Irish people responded to his message of love.

One of the fascinating aspects of the new baby boom is that they are actually the Pope’s children’s children. Each generation is an echo of the one that went before. We are having children later now than our parents, but each baby boom will tend to replicate itself a generation later. So it would be logical to put this baby boom down to this natural process. But on closer examination, when we look at who is having children in Ireland, we can see that this isn’t the case.

Screen Shot 2013-05-30 at 09.51.09

If you look at the table, which is taken from the yearly ESRI Perinatal Reports for 2004-2011 and the CSO Vital Statistics report, you can see that the number of immigrants having kids is rapidly rising. In 2004, the first year that we had information on the nationality of mothers, 18pc of the children born in Ireland were born to immigrants.

Last year, immigrants accounted for 23.5pc of all births. If we take the data and extrapolate the trend out, we can see that by 2018, 30pc of the babies born in Ireland will be to non-Irish mothers. In contrast, Irish mothers, who accounted for 81.9pc in 2004 are likely to drop to 69pc by 2018.

births to irish mothers copy

Two demographic factors could be going on in the numbers. The first could explain why the proportion of Irish-born mothers is falling quite rapidly. One explanation might be because Irish-born women are choosing not to have children in much greater numbers than would be normally expected. Another explanation could be that there is such high emigration of women in their late 20s and early 30s – the median age for starting a family. This suggests that Irish-born mothers are simply not here. They are in Australia, the UK or elsewhere.

On the other hand, immigrant mothers are having more kids. This is the normal pattern with immigration. When people arrive from a foreign country, particularly a poorer foreign country, they tend to have larger families. If they are from more traditional countries, this will be the case. Within one generation, immigrant family sizes tend to conform to the norm of those in the new country, but initially they are outliers.

This is why immigration is normally a boost for a country because the immigrant population swells the local population immediately and then for at least one generation, immigrants have more children.

Economic growth is a function of the size of the labour force and the productivity of that labour force. Therefore when the labour force is rising there should be an inbuilt dynamism that pushes up the growth rate. This is assuming that the productivity of the labour force rises too.

It is clear why we need to get the economy going again and get it growing robustly. The labour force is growing and, as immigrants have more children, the immigrant proportion of the population will be rising most rapidly. In order to head off the type of social problems faced by many western European countries with large immigrant populations, such as was seen in Sweden last week, we have to get our economic act together. This doesn’t just mean growth, but education, town planning and housing strategies.

Naturally, politicians react to the concerns of their electorate, but electorates are already grown up by then. Real economic planning doesn’t start at the ballot box but in the maternity ward which is why what happens today in Holles Street is of such importance to all of us.

Subscribe to receive my news and articles direct to your inbox

  1. Pat Flannery

    “Real economic planning doesn’t start at the ballot box but in the maternity ward”. Good line. Perhaps the Northern Ireland immigrants and the Republic’s immigrants will combine and vote for a united Ireland.

  2. Hi David,

    Is this extrapolation published and justified anywhere? I have maths questions.

    I guess this is not just an Irish phenomenon. Old, but an interesting read:

  3. hibernian56

    WOW, touchy subject? No takers? Ok let me kick it off…

    It all boils down to can we handle the emigration a little better than other countries?

    It’s funny, you can’t talk about this subject without some PC nut claiming you’re racist. But in my opinion (and we are still allowed to have opinions) and without over simplification, there are three types of emigrant;

    Type 1. Mainly Economic emigrants. Those that want to integrate and contribute to the destination society. These guys are prepared to work to earn a living, pay taxes and obey the local customs / laws etc. At the same time they have a sense of belonging to both new and old country. (Think Paddy in the US, Australia etc).

    Type 2. They are mixed Economic / Political refugees. They wan’t whats best for themselves or their families. They have no problem working, want to integrate and make great citizens. (Think East European)

    Type 3. Chancer. Pretends to be a “Political” refugee. Will do anything to survive. Tries to either get pregnant or make somebody pregnant. Will even resort to marriage to get a passport. Likeable rogues, but more than likely a pariah to their host nation. (Think politician)

    Type 4. Confused emigrants, did they leave home because they were broke or because of their anti whatever political views? These have a sense of entitlement who want to survive in the short term and ultimately return “home” someday. Theses guys might work, but only in their terms. They want to reconstruct a copy of their idealistic idea of their native land, live under their laws, eat their food and live by their customs. They have little sense of belonging to their new home and so do not want or try to contribute, why should they? (Think extremist, or British tourist)

    They are worlds apart in terms of their attitude and the problems they help create and solve for their new country of residence. We must assume that most emigrants are transient, they will leave again if the conditions are not suitable. This scenario applies to both types of emigrant.

    Integration and education is our problem. I am of the view that “When in Rome do as the Roman’s do”, not this wishy washy PC crap we have seen that ultimately leads to ethnic ghettos. I have seen the negative sides of this in Helsinki, Stockholm, London, Paris, Marseilles (frightening in some places), Berlin etc. I have also the positive sides of this, Ok I can only think of China town in a lot of US cities. Either way you are looking at a state within a state and ultimately a black market, racketeering and all the other problems associated with marginalising emigrants.

    We can take any number of “type 1″ and “type 2″ emigrants, they will certainly improve our gene pool at least!! “Type 4″ emigrants pose the problem.

    Our biggest problem however is that on one hand we are a small country with limited resources faced with the problem of ECONOMIC migration of “type 3 & 4″ pariah emigrants, thanks to our colonial neighbours who turned a blind eye when the emigrants were travelling through Europe to get to the land of milk, honey and welfare. These emigrants are perfectly happy to accept whatever’s going, as it is better than nothing, which is what they had previously.

    On the other hand we can’t support our natives, because they “don’t qualify” because they have too few, too many, no stamps or any of the thousands of other excuses I have heard social welfare give to citizens. “You were self employed” being my favourite. These citizens are or course then forced to leave.

    The system stinks. I draw the line at giving housing, any form of welfare supplements, transport allowances, and the other myriad of freebies being handed over lest we dubbed a racist nation. Why do we offer everything to some groups who have nothing or no intention to offer anything in return?

    Unfortunately, numbers of emigrants have understandably the sole interests of their families at heart. They don’t care about Ireland, like the few of us that WORKED abroad during our youths they most likely have dreams of returning HOME someday. They crtainly don’t have dreams of living in a ghetto a la most of our EU neighbours.

    Do any of us have issue with an Emigrant who comes into a country to work and earn money to support his / her family? I think most of us would answer no. But, what about groups who enter a country specifically to live off welfare with the mid-term goal of family support / education?

    The Geneva convention, largely ignored today stipulates that political asylum must be applied for in the first country of call. A huge majority of emigrants claim to be political asylum seekers, yet travelled through most of Europe to get here. We should have tighter border control for a start and simply refuse entry, although I would imagine it’s largely too late from what you can see when out and about.

    Another thing that ilks is the notion of EU “quotas” for non-EU emigrants.

    Remind me why I pay PRSI or PAYE? Tell me why I can’t get a medical card or benefits?

    Oh, that’s right, because I’m working. Rant over, back to work.

  4. Reality Check

    Good post Hibernian.
    It’s that old problem with forced integration and the stifling of debate/discussion because of the Orwellian PC brigade.


    During the eighties, 700,000 people sat the leaving cert. The number of people working declined from 1.6 to 1.06 millions. The only career option for most was sweeping the floor of the local food/super/market @ £1 an hour. There is nothing wrong with a high birth rate provide you have a turbo charged economy generating sustainable employment, not going to happen when we are locked in the overvalued euro.
    In the 1950′s , families of 15 kids were common, their only option was to join the half million who emigrated. I have never seen the ratioale in encouraging people to have over sized families. It puts huge pressure on welfare and education budgets and leads to a bankrupt welfare system in the present. Unemployment in the 6 counties is half the level in the south, partly thanks to sensible family planning. Some chemist shops in the republic don’t sell condoms !

    • seamus189

      I think the birth rate’s still slightly higher in the North so fail to see the ‘family planning’ argument. First time I’ve ever heard anyone praising the NI economic model given that unemployment is a lot lower mainly due to being propped up by the bloated public sector.

  6. Ancient Irish Settlements

    We are a land of Immigrants except those now are perceived as ‘New’ . Most of us are only a few generations Irish .I am a third generation.Population movement is a flux always and it is the Elite that only benefit from it .

    The current implosion of arrivals will be seen as being greater than Cromwells Plantation .Especially in terms of numbers and unlike the former the latter will create a new working class and assist in the polarisation between the haves and have nots .It is a recipe for the direction politics will play in the near future. Namely Socially Left .

    I have recently completed a thesis on the very earliest arrivals in this island of ours more than 10,000 years ago and have it backed up with places, names and words that form a substrate language to the original Irish language we know . I am lost to know how I can get this into the public domain and would welcome any assistance .

    • hibernian56

      HI John, that sounds like a very interesting read.

      Did you do it with time coded migration maps too? I would be interested to see if we started on the East coast, or South coast and worked inland. Also, were there any peaks or troughs in our population, due to the then land bridge with Britain.

      Also what impact did the shrinking shore line have? I remember an interesting find in the UK a few years ago, Oak Henge? It was a stone henge type structure built with Oak trees, located in the sea. It became visible only due to exceptionally low tides. It clearly demonstrated the drastic changes to the coast line, another factor they didn’t seem to mention was the age of the Oak trees. I must rummage through google later.

      Can I get a copy? Sounds like the type of thing I enjoy reading in National Geographic.

    • bonbon

      As regards ancient language and diffusion, have a look here :
      That Archive on CD/Journals is in many UNI’s vaults – rarely discussed. Very high quality reports also from Irish contributors.

      The key theme is the non-existence of “autochtonous” independent development anywhere. Evidence of vast sea-faring over 100,000 years or more is to be found. The key is open ocean navigation.

      Things really upset Oxford, though, when evidence of Godelic (ancient Irish), Phoenician, Egyptian, Arabic settlements in Maine, Virginia, Oaklahoma, New England, and as far as the Frasier River (Alberta) turn up.

      Maritime economics (globalisation, “trade”) still dominates the only existing global empire, the British Empire, from those ancient days. This is why transcontinental maglev, deep-harbor tunnels disturb them to their fishy depths. It is but a short step from language to economics.

    • bonbon

      Also the New England Antiquities Research Association

  7. Jimmy Gavin

    I suppose the one thing most people agree about when discussing “austerity” is that it doesn’t require a great deal of creativity to implement. Maybe it’s just as well, because when you look around the present ministerial cabinet one cannot but conclude that the level of creativity amongst the present incumbents is very similar to the previous FF/Green “gombosity”, (gombosity being a word that I have created to describe a ‘collection of gombeens’). I am tempted to suggest that the present gombosity looks a good deal more sober than the last outfit, but given their aversion to providing “breath tests” it is hard to draw any meaningful conclusions on this matter…..

    Needless to say that the real challenge facing Ireland at the moment is to create sustainable growth, which should by extension create jobs, wealth, opportunities and so forth. Therein lies the problem folks, the people who control the levers haven’t a clue how to create anything other than further debts……Administrators is what you have in charge in Ireland…..distribute the present tax take and devise new taxes, to do, what they mistakenly assume will “balance the books”……….

    I discovered a while ago, that there were three ways to go when engaged in negotiations. Most text books outline two and tell you that you have a choice between a zero sum scenario, which for the uninitiated means dividing up the existing resources, with a gain for one side leading to a loss for the other side. The other well known method is what is often termed a win-win scenario where both sides use creative solutions to increase the value of the existing resources so as to maximise the benefits to those engaged in the negotiations. This latter category is well described by the work of the Harvard business school, with bestseller books like “Getting to Yes” by Fisher and Ury etc.

    This latter theory is also supported by the work of Walton and McKersie on “integrative bargaining” from an earlier time…..The third category is one I would describe as a “diminishing sum” scenario which is the one I think is being erroneously pursued by the misguided folks in Ireland. My belief is that when you reduce the available resources through austerity measures, you reduce the capital available for productive purpose and the attendant loss in velocity leads to a downward deflationary spiral which makes all parties to the negotiations POORER AS A RESULT…this is a loose –loose scenario which only the foolish or misguided would advocate…….

    The “Eurocrats” and by extension their “minions” in the DOF in Ireland have finally arrived at the point where they realise that the third scenario as outlined above of austerity or diminishing sum is not the best option and have decided to concentrate their efforts in what they are calling “structural reforms”. Now don’t get me wrong, structural reforms are very necessary on an ongoing basis when new, effective and efficient approaches become available to assist what Joseph Schumpeter called “creative destruction”. But alas my fear is that our Gombosity will embrace these new “structural reforms” with the same lack of creativity, vision and sense of sustainable development that has been the hallmark of successive ADMINISTRATIONS since the foundation of the state…….

    • bonbon

      Don’t get me wrong, but London’s Economist Magazine “Schumpeter Column” promotes what Schumpeter himself adopted, Sombard’s economics, the Nietzschean economics of Hitler’s Hjalmar Schacht.

      Now it is ironic that the push to the United States of Europe, originally proposed by Churchill and British fascist Sir Oswald Mosley, demands Schumpeter economics.

      But, not really surprising is it? Not really surprising FG play along either, is it?

      • hibernian56

        No it’s not.

        I’m a nationalist. I believe in socialism. I don’t believe in national socialism. I do however believe that the citizen should be put before the state. I don’t believe employee’s of the state should put their interests before the state via their gouging union tactics. There is a clear pecking order;

        1. Citizen
        2. State
        3. State employee
        4. Non citizen
        5. Foreign non-domestic bodies (i.e. EU)

        Paying Tax does not give status. Tax disgusts me. It breeds laziness as it pays to support non-productive elements of a society. Politicians and civil service being the worst offenders.

        And lets not be dragged into the over simplification of the term civil servant. I am not talking about Gardai, nurses, firemen etc. I am talking about the asshole with a title and a clipboard working for XYZ regulator.

        Citizenship is sacrosanct and should be regarded as a privilege. Working for the state should be viewed as a privilege in that your are serving the citizen. It should not allow access to entitlements.

        However, time & time again the majority of this country’s citizens have proven themselves to be incapable of making decisions based on their best interests and instead revert to herd politics. e.g. A politician kicks the bucket and goes to hell and his/her sibling replaces them. This is royalty in all but name. We have replaces kings with politicians, warlords with civil servant deputies. All non-productive. All pariahs that you, me our children support through taxes.

        In this nation have had over 80 years to give us Utopia. Every year we move closer towards being livestock for the purposes of consuming to produce tax.

        A major problem we have is that even the mainstream lefties (Labour) are too self centred to care about the citizens of this country or its better interests. Then we have the United Left. Enough said. All may expound principals to the “public” (I foam at the mouth when I hear that expression), but each one to a man still accepts their disgustingly exorbitant salary, pension and perks every month.

        Most other politicians are shameless self promotion exercises. The 4 P’s of politics;

        Preservation = Pay = Perks = Pension. Politics is a circular feeding frenzy.

        They (all politicians, senior “civil” service and the EU mandarins) are however VERY interested in our resources. Just ask Bertie and his Forrest Fund friends, scumbags being led by a scumbag. No friend of this nation or its citizens.

        Rant number 2 over, back to work again.

    • Adam Byrne

      Spot on Jim.

    • molly

      Forcing into law pay and condictions by this government is just the start of it ,if this was a free country why did the government put pay, property tax,water miters,ect to the Irish people and let the people decide.

      • Adelaide

        “… to the Irish people and let the people decide.”

        Check out Direct Democracy, I recently discovered them, they’ll be getting my vote in the next election.

  8. molly

    Look at the amount of money that’s poring out of this country.
    How many people here living on social welfair are able to send money out of the country as if by magic.
    For some people coming to Ireland is like winning the lotto.

  9. michaelcoughlan


    This article is necessary, timely, very courageous but the point is badly made. You could do something straight away to balance the numbers in favour of the natives rather than increase the birth rate you could restrict the numbers coming to work here irrespective of ethinc origin, releigious belief, sexual orientation or gender.

    Can’t imagine the mullingar motor mouth et al would be too happy. He wouldn’t be able to fuck the staff every which way he wanted with min wage jobs, revolving door contracts intimidation and harassment then would he?

    The establishment want MORE dirt cheap foreign labour David not less. You hardly think creating sustainable employment well paid jobs for our own young people is something the government wants do you? They don’t. We can only look to ourselves to provide for ourselves now.

    • molly

      The government and co will make good paying jobs for there own click .
      The only way we can make the same jobs is with an up hill struggle with every possible red tape and mountain in our way.
      Buy in fairness to us we vote them in does not matter witch way you pour out the vomit it’s still vomit pass me the sick bucket please.

  10. Adelaide

    In his lecture “Immigration and the Mature Welfare State” Milton Friedman makes a compelling argument that they are incompatible. In summary, no historical record shows an ‘economic’ boost delivered by immigrants when the country receiving them has a mature welfare state, quite the opposite.
    This incompatibility produces the ethnic ghetto due the Welfare System’s incongruity to upward mobility of the immigrant. Friedman was no fan of the welfare state but a big fan of open migration. He asserts that immigration only has had a positive economic effect on those countries senza welfare. He backs up the claim with records etc. The Whys and Wherefores I’ll not rehash.
    The point of my comment is that his argument undermines the generalization that inward migration is a good thing economically, nopes, it can be damaging to the economy if that economy/society has matured into a welfare state. The thrust of his lecture is that the structure of the welfare state is inherently anti-immigration.

    Not to sound flippant but they are more clear and present dangers to society than possible future ethnic riots.

    • Pat Flannery

      Good contribution Adelaide. Food for thought.

    • bonbon

      You are missing the point about Milton Friedman exactly. To prove Milton Friedman is fascist, just quote him, which we will do right away. The US is a country of immigration, and FDR’s New Deal and social security, just shows the world Friedman’s fascism is on the march right here in the United States of Europe where all of these are to be reformed away including the bank depositor’s insurance based on FDR’s FDIC. Obama is going after Social Security in the U.S.

      Economist Arthur Laffer once said, “You want to prove that Friedman is a fascist? It’s easy. Quote him.”

      So why not quote : “The object of such controls [on wages, prices, and credit] is the restriction of spending on the part of individuals,” Friedman wrote in his Studies in the Quantity Theory of Money. “Such a policy, if rigorously enforced, should restrain a rise in the price level. This policy appeared to have been successful in Nazi Germany.”

      Now I know DMcW praised Friedman the “free thinker” here at least 2 times. Many are taken in with the Chicago School of Friedman. So timely quotes are urgently, early and often, now necessary. We do not want the clear danger of a Pinochet (that Chicago darling) in any form or guise, marching, strutting around here, now do we?

      • Adelaide

        Bonbon, are you infatuated with Nazism? You seem to take every opportunity to include the word ‘Nazi’ in your comments to denigrate seemingly everyone.

        (Which is ironic considering the one endeavour that the Nazis excelled at was the managed recovery of their economy pre-war and their enlightened monetary policy, so much so that according to “Bankers’ Wars” the ‘real’ reason the Allied Forces went to war was to protect their Private Banking cartel against the Public Banking contagious upstart.)

        • bonbon

          Hitler’s finance minister Hjalmar Schacht was the head of the Bank for International Settlements, BIS, Basel, the bankers bank still today. That makes Hitler a bankers boy, in case Friedman neglected to tell you.

          Schachtian economics, concentration camps (borrowed from the Boer War) is the essence of austerity, turned against the nation. Same today in the U.S.E, where work makes you free. The Troika are bankers boys, and what do you call guaranteeing zombie banks?

          FDR split WallStreet, with Glass-Steagall, the private cartel. They then ran the “Business Plot” to ocupy D.C. Look it up. The very same crowd that financed Hitler’s NSDAP election, including Prescott Bush and Norman Montague of the B.of. England.

      • bonbon

        You brought, yet again a “famed economist” to back your argument. The last time it was E.C. Riegel, this time Friedman. As I have shown Friedman was a fascist, espoused fascist economics, admired Nazi economics. Riegel attacked FDR viciously for opposing fascism.
        Simply quote Friedman, early and often. It’s easy.

        As for Pinochet, guess what the first move was in Chile – privatizing the welfare system. Thatcher admired Pinochet so much he was invited to Diner.

        You railed against the welfare state, I showed he very serious error of your ways, yet again.

        • Adelaide

          Oh, and I forgot. “Fascist”. That word crops up a lot in your comments too. “Glass-Steagall, Nazis and Fascists”.
          Replace “Glass-Steagall” with “Sharks” as in “Sharks, Nazis and UFO Fascists” and you have yourself a Discovery Channel all of your own.

          ps why are you always haranguing Pinochet? Nobody mentions him bar you.

          • bonbon

            Friedman did and Maggie. An example of what a Friedman nudge-nudge wink-wink “suggestion really means.

            The Ugly Truth about Milton Friedman is available on Amazon. No excuses now.

        • michaelcoughlan

          Your posts sans glass stegal are a revelation.

    • michaelcoughlan

      “In his lecture “Immigration and the Mature Welfare State” Milton Friedman makes a compelling argument that they are incompatible. In summary, no historical record shows an ‘economic’ boost delivered by immigrants when the country receiving them has a mature welfare state”

      Hi Adelaide. Your point isn’t well made. The reason inward immigration is “bad” for an economy in the eyes of a scumbag like Friedman is that the new labour gets woefully exploited and the wage levels get forced into the gutter. Lower wages means less tax for the state but the other dynamic
      is that the resident labour living in the higher cost economy is forced ONTO the dole because the wages don’t cover the cost of living. It matters less for the transient labour which will return home to a lower cost homeland someday.

      What scumbag Friedman means when he says you control inflation by keeping the spending power of the individuals in check is that in a society where there Is no of little welfare the resident labour will see an enormous drop in their living standard as a result of the race to the bottom which will ensue when too manny workers chase too few jobs with all the newly arrived labour looking for work.

      Look at Ireland plenty of eastern europens being treated dreadfully in shit jobs while thousands of displaced Irish youngsters forced out to Australia and Canada where there is a chance they will get a job where they get paid properly.

      Our youngsters were hung out to dry along time ago. That’s because the real scumbags in all of this is we Irish ourselves.

      • bonbon

        Imported scumbag economics is dangerous. The failure to resist is because of Michael D’s “anti-intellectual” lurch recently.

        It takes a clear head to, rage does not help, self-loathing neither.

        As you may have noticed, DMcW posted this in “behavioural economics”, a bestial approach to economics where we are treated a fancy ape, pleasure and pain economics. Right away, this “fancy” theory will be exposed for the windy bog-cotton drawers it really is.

  11. bonbon

    Ladies and Gentlemen, this is something that must be done outside maternity wards, to give the kids a future. It is expected that adults take this in their stride, would’nt ye think?

    Glass-Steagall Resolution Introduced in New York State Assembly!

    On May 29, the resolution, K490, sponsored by Assemblyman Phil Steck (D-Schenectedy), was introduced. K490 currently has 19 co-sponsors, including 3 Republicans. It has been referred to the Committee on Banks.

  12. bonbon

    That’s a record for the blog, Milton Friedman AND Schumpeter, both fascist economists, quoted here within a day of each other.

    Either the blog attracts such luminaries, or people have just no idea what they are talking about – which is it DMcW?

  13. redriversix


    Tony Brogan…Court 16 four courts 11.00 today..Judgement due on major case against B.O.S come down if you can..might be a good experience for you to enjoy while in Ireland


  14. redriversix


    Tony Brogan…Court 16 four courts 11.00 today..Judgement due on major case against B.O.S come down if you can..might be a good experience for you to enjoy while in Ireland,Call me if you can.


  15. bonbon

    DMcW, you posted this “baby” in “Behvioral Economics”. Well how’s this for obscene criminal behavior, and in public too!

    The City of London, Troika Turn the Eurozone into Asset-Stripping Death Trap: Derivatives and Deutsche Bank

    Just have a look at the effort to save Deutsche Bank sitting on $72 Trillion derivatives worthless paper.

    This is obscene offensive public behavior!

  16. bonbon

    Behavioral economics, the chapter of this theme, what does this mean? A seemingly harmless “well-intentioned” approach? From Nov 2012 :

    Watch out Ireland! Behavioural Economics “Scientists” heading to Dublin

    The Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), ESRI’s multi -million euro budget comes from the Department of Finance, other Government and international bodies and an assortment of business interests. The ESRI website announced the horrible event:

    “Applying Behavioural Economics to Public Policy”.

    One of the UK’s leading policymakers will describe how insights from behavioural economics are being used to design new initiatives across UK government departments and agencies. The session will also hear from a leading behavioural economist on the potential benefits and dangers of applying this groundbreaking area to policy. The lead British speaker : How the Market Gives Us What We Want — Even if We Are Irrational Professor Robert Sugden, University of East Anglia”.

    See the ESRI page for the full horror story :

    The Who’s Who of European Behaviorist Economists, including British and Swedish luminaries.

    The entire “school” of behavioral economists including R.Schiller, G. Akerlof, P.Orzag, trace their roots to Keynes’ “animal spirits”, “a spontaneous urge to action rather than inaction”.

    Are we Irish now expected to play “animal spirits”, while the Troika literally strip the entire economy of any chance for a labor force?

You must log in to post a comment.
× Hide comments