He offered no comment on an assertion by Irish Central Bank governor Patrick Honohan that Irish borrowing costs were “ridiculous” and declined to say whether he agreed with the assessment from the National Treasury Management Agency that the SP downgrade stemmed from a “flawed” analysis.

Mr. Trichet talking yesterday.

These figures I’ve collated from the census returns, taking the broad industry groups as presented in the 1971 census and working backwards.

What that means is that, for example, in 1971 agriculture, forestry and fishing are grouped as one. In 1951 agriculture and fishing are separate, so for purposes of comparison I’ve merged them, etc, etc.

In 1966, however, there were slight changes in the composition of five of the broad groups which I cannot decipher from the information as listed in the returns, so I’ve presented the returns for 1961 as they appear in both 1961 and 1966. The groupings which don’t exactly match up are presented in red.

An excel of the table is here.

Don’t know if anyone else will find the table useful or interesting. I’ll be using it for the book myself, but just thought I’d put it up in case it ties into any research people are doing on employment in Ireland during that period.

There are many explanations for the crisis of capital that began in 2007. But the one thing missing is an understanding of “systemic risks.”

I was alerted to this when Her Majesty the Queen visited the London School of Economics and asked the prestigious economists there how come they had not seen the crisis coming.

Being a feudal monarch rather than an ordinary mortal, the economists felt impelled to answer.

After six months of reflection the economic gurus of the British Academy submitted their conclusions. The gist was that many intelligent and dedicated economists had worked assiduously and hard on understanding the micro-processes. But everyone had somehow missed “systemic risk.”

A year later, a former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund said “we sort of know vaguely what systemic risk is and what factors might relate to it. But to argue that it is a well-developed science at this point is overstating the fact.” In a formal paper, the IMF described the study of systemic risk as “in its infancy.”

In Marxian theory (as opposed to myopic neoclassical or financial theory), “systemic risk” translates into the fundamental contradictions of capital accumulation. The IMF might save itself a lot of trouble by studying them.

So how, then, can we put Marx’s theorization of the internal contradictions of capitalism to work to understand the roots of our contemporary dilemmas?

You can read the rest of Harvey’s paper here.

Just came across this quote from Liam Cosgrave in 1971. Dáil Debates, Vol.255, 1 July 1971, paragraphs 403-405.

I find it interesting because, well it could have said last week, couldn’t it?

I also want to direct attention to another fringe problem, the delay in completing estates.

It is an intolerable situation in which people find themselves when they are paying heavy rates each year, with rates rising year after year, paying for all the services involved in the rates charge, having already paid a heavy deposit on houses in most cases and in some cases having purchased them but in the majority of cases they are paying off very expensive loans.

It was said here that the cost of loans at present in this country is one of the highest in Europe, probably one of the highest in the world. At present the cost of loans is a tremendous burden. These people are paying rates and are good citizens but the only service they get from the local authority other than the water supply, which they are paying for, is to have their bins collected and have the roads swept.

Many of these estates are left unfinished and in some cases a racket has developed. When the work is completed by the builder if there is a piece of ground remaining in some cases they go so far as to transfer the property to people of straw so that they can not be proceeded against.

In one part of my constituency at Kilmacud it was found that a company had transferred a piece of ground that was left in a deplorable condition to somebody in St. Kevin’s Hospital, a man “on the way out”. They had done this in order to avoid fulfilling their obligations. That is a most objectionable matter. Steps should be taken by the Department in consultation with the local authority, and there is power under the 1963 Planning Act, to see that the work is completed so that people will have proper services.

In addition—and this is a vital matter— there should be an overriding standard set by the local authority in consultation with the Department that in all newly-developed estates adequate playing facilities will be provided and, whether the estate is developed by one or more builders, that it is part of the recognised plan and will be enforced by the local authority and the Department that facilities will be provided.

In a whole range of fringe areas in County Dublin, and particularly in the area with which I am familiar, Rathdown, there are inadequate facilities or there is excessive delay in providing the facilities and in many cases the facilities are provided only after a group of people come together in a sports club or bring together in one organisation a whole lot of organisations, such as the GAA and other groups, and form themselves into a social centre and provide facilities which they all avail of.

There ought to be in every scheme adopted by the local authority and sanctioned by the Department a standard set that schemes will not be approved and sanction will not issue unless the scheme provides for adequate playing facilities and recreational facilities.

In a great many of these areas the facilities that have been provided up to the present leave much to be desired and are a standing reproach, being far removed from the type of services that should be included in these schemes.

Most of these schemes are left in an unfinished condition and delay in getting work carried out has meant that some of the children whose parents went into these schemes have grown to adulthood before the facilities are provided.

The provision of facilities is particularly important at a time when we are talking about conservation and there is so much literature published on that subject. In many areas the surroundings are pleasant in the sense that they are adjacent to mountains and the countryside and they have adequate ground space provided it is preserved and not encroached on, for financial reasons, by being built on, regardless of the needs of people.

I wrote an article on mortgages and home ownership for the latest print edition of Look Left, which is out now.

It is available in Dublin in Books Upstairs, Connolly Books and all O’Connell Street newspaper vendors

Today though I decided to see if anyone had written a review and I came across the ever reliable State one which describes it better than I could. But there were two shows, and the State one describes the first night, while I attended the second. So I’m pasting in their review here for the first night and adding my thoughts on the second one, just to try to get out of the habit of putting such things off.

I know one reader anyway who might appreciate it.

(more…)

100 Borrowers. That’s it for stage one and two. Average of 35 loans per borrower.

The original value of the loans was €52 billion, which means that for each borrower, an average of €520 million.

When you think about it, the few million that these guys gave in donations to the three main political parties, it was the cheapest insurance policy ever.

The amount of loans by institution.

This means that each borrower took out, on average,

5 loans with Allied Irish Bank

5 loans with Bank of Ireland

23 loans with Anglo Irish Bank

The loans as a percentage of the total, by institution

Great post by Michael Taft over on Irish Left Review, about the well-known exports tax scam known as the “Double-Irish”.

Well worth checking out.

The story of the tax scam has gone around the world and some at this stage, but I’ve yet to see or hear of it on Irish TV or radio, or in the print media.

Following on from my own little dabbling on this story, last week I put up some numbers relating to financial service exports in Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, and Spain.

The figures are very rough, but we can still use them to illustrate a couple of points.

We know the figures for the amount of people involved in financial services (and software) export businesses in Ireland, as IDA Ireland lists them in its 2009 annual report.

In 2008, there were 63,932 people employed in that sector, and according to the World Trade Organisation, exports in financial and services sector amounted to $22.7 billion.

Now, I know the figures don’t match up, but bear with me here. When we put one into the other, we get $355,065 in export sales generated per employee.

This is just an exercise , and the inclusion of software in financial services workers by IDA Ireland means that the figure should be higher than $355,065, but ball-park this is what we are talking about.

Unfortunately, I don’t know how to get my hands on the employment figures for financial service exports for Spain, Netherlands, and Italy. Any help there greatly appreciated.

But, I do have, via the World Trade Organisation, the value of financial service exports for 2008 for each of those countries.

In order to have the same productivity as their Irish workers - that is $355,065 in export sales - then the following numbers have to apply.

Spain: financial service exports = $7.3 billion. Total employment = 312,000.

This means 20,559 working in financial exports in order to generate sales of $355,065 per worker. That’s around 6.5 per cent of all employees in exports, and 93.5 per cent working solely within the Spanish financial services market. No contact with the rest of the world.

Netherlands: financial service exports = $6.3 billion. Total employment = 165,000.

This means 17,753 working in financial service exports in order to generate sales of $355,065 per worker. That’s around 10.75 per cent and 89.25 per cent working solely within the Netherlands financial services market. No contact with the rest of the world.

Italy: financial service exports = $6.1 billion. total employment = 393,764.

This means 17,180 working in financial services exports in order to generate sales of $355,065 per worker. That’s around 4.3 per cent of all financial service employees in exports, with 95.7 per cent working solely within the internal Italian financial market. No contact with the rest of the world.

As my friend Donal says, there should be Ph.Ds written on how Ireland is able to achieve such productivity in financial services. Students from around the world should be queueing up to work in the IFSC in order to understand how Ireland achieves these financial miracles.

Of course, there is a reason why this is not happening.

It is because they are a fiction. A complete lie. A tax scam which was covered back in 2007 by the trade journal, International Securitization and Finance Report.

The article is in the May 2007 edition, available here.

Have a read. It’s quite enlightening and non-judgemental. It just tells you how to avoid paying tax by playing the Double-Irish.

Only 13.5 per cent of NAMA loans relate to residential property developments for resale - yet listen to the newspapers, TV and radio and it’s all ghost estates this and cracked pavements that.

Anyway, the loans which NAMA has bought relate to the following:

Investment Property - 47.5 %

Land = 22.5 %

Hotels = 13.5 % - 35 hotels in Ireland and 13 outside Ireland.

Residential Property = 13.5 %

Developments (less than 30% complete) = 3 %

The figures are here.

I know that the right-wing will still make out that the property bubble was all about residential houses, but the truth is that the real damage was caused by commercial property builders and speculators, Section 23 Hotels, and bankers.

The residential property market is a sideshow. But that’s where all the bells are being rung.