# David McWilliams - In Search of the Pope's Children



## sherib (6 Nov 2006)

Did anyone see David McWilliams new show this evening? Only so-so I thought. Hyperactive photography and a lot of it a re-hash of his book. Maybe it'll get better. 

He claimed the foundations of the New Ireland aren't half as stable as we'd like to believe saying it was founded upon three economic factors: cheap credit, cheap energy and cheap labour. One gem was an interviewee from China saying he hoped that his people would buy up all of Parnell Street - then we'd have our very own China Town. Another was that when fuel prices rise by 20% people would accept nuclear power to maintain our new living standards. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he's right about that.


----------



## Chamar (6 Nov 2006)

One big ad for his overrated book. I like him but he's in danger of becoming a bit of a parody of sorts. I think he needs to come up with something new. He has flogged this property crash thing to death at this stage


----------



## rabbit (7 Nov 2006)

sherib said:


> One gem was an interviewee from China saying he hoped that his people would buy up all of Parnell Street - then we'd have our very own China Town.


 
Look at how many places in Britain and Europe have changed over the last generation or two. In some areas, you are in a minority if you are ethnic white.

Still, I suppose we cannot complain if a nationality takes over a street or area.   Look at how we "colonised" Cricklewood and Kilburn etc, not to mention Glasgow, with Irish migration.   Question is, will the Chinese form their own soccer team...Dublin Celtic ....and sing C.R.A. songs / wave Chinese flags at the matches   ?   lol


----------



## liteweight (7 Nov 2006)

I'm hoping that the first program was just full of sound bites for the next few. Heard a lot of statements made about the economy but don't know if he has anything to back them up or if it's just his take on it. Found music and flashy camera work irritating and a distraction.


----------



## whathome (7 Nov 2006)

liteweight said:


> Found music and flashy camera work irritating and a distraction.


 
Absolutely agree, I started to get a headache trying to follow the images, seemed as if nothing was on screen for more than two seconds. It was like watching a high speed economic documentary produced by MTV. Most of the points were a re-hash from the book but I found it interesting enough to watch all the way through to questions & answers


----------



## bogwarrior (7 Nov 2006)

sherib said:


> Another was that when fuel prices rise by 20% people would accept nuclear power to maintain our new living standards.



he also said that if fuel prices went up by 20%, then peoples disposable income would go down by 20% - which is a nice soundbite but isn't factually correct.

I also enjoy him and find his points interesting but this show was only of interest to anyone who hadn't read his book or his articles in the Sunday Business Post - there was nothing new in it.

George Lee's Boom show earlier on in the year was more interesting, imho.


----------



## edo (7 Nov 2006)

Yeah! pretty much agree with most of the comments above - tho to give the guy his credit he is pretty much the only one out there trying to make a fist of trying to explain the last 15 years or so (there is a distinct lack of commentary both verbal or otherwise on this - wonder why?) 

You could argue it had a lot in common with George Lees' Boom - I believe they come to the same basic premise - that unless we start thinking about movin on economically , the whole edifice is being built on the property boom - shaky foundations. Personally I do find the categorisations and the jump from one arguement to another very very fast and the sometimes hard and fast way he has with stats when they suit him a bit much at times( Irelands inward legal migration rate from the Eastern European states is higher than France or Germany's - Well no s**t Dave! wouldn't be anything to do with the fact that neither have opened their employment borders to these states yet would it!)

While I personally found Lee's programme better (so far) , as regards basic economic arguement - I think that Mcwilliams style will appeal to far more people .

If I've learned anything in my life so far , its that  the vast majority of people , despite all the protests to the contrary , love being categorised and stereotyped and put into groups and especially class - McWilliams does this with aplomb - his talent is he makes you feel you understand economics and all criticism above withstanding : the programme will definitely get folks who ,normally at the sight of a suit and a mention of economics would be watching sky at the drop of a hat , to tune in.

I got the book for christmas last year - read it in 2 days or so - passed it on to the old man - who has now passed it 5-6 times to his friends - all he could talk about was how he could recognise the various characters and subsets that McWilliams has in his arguements - the decklanders etc etc and to my amazement and shock , for the first time in all the time I have known him , we are having conversations about economics , the future ,politics etc etc - this from a man who before when asked about his political leanings would reply "its a secret ballot" and that would be it until the next election . I 've had similar conversations with his friends.

 So ,even tho the book was a bestseller , Im quite sure Cecila Ahern has quite comfortably outsold him by a considerable margin - if the TV programme, which will hit a far wider audience , can get people talking and debating about the subjects he raises - well and good - he's done a public service and fair play to him.


----------



## TarfHead (7 Nov 2006)

The book and the Tv programme have the same author & the same name - yet some posters are critical that they were similar ?

What were you expecting  ?

It's something that is very easy to criticise - he's a braver man than me for going out in public with THAT quiff  - but it's something that isn't discussed enough. Many people in Ireland have mortgaged their futures to pay for the present and, to paraphrase the late John Healy, no-one has shouted stop, least of all the political elite who claim to be responsible for the boom.


----------



## whizzbang (7 Nov 2006)

*The TV show "In search of the Pope’s Children" will it have any effect?*

I was watching Dave McWilliams excellent show last night on RTE and I was wondering if people though it would have any effect on the man in the street? Or will we happily keep spending themselves into oblivion?

Has anyone been in any watercooler conversations about the show?


----------



## efm (7 Nov 2006)

*Re: The TV show "In search of the Pope’s Children" will it have any effect?*



whizzbang said:


> I was watching Dave McWilliams excellent show last night on RTE and I was wondering if people though it would have any effect on the man in the street? Or will we happily keep spending themselves into oblivion?
> 
> Has anyone been in any watercooler conversations about the show?


 
I watched it and thought it was very entertaining but I am not sure that anything he said justifies anyone changing any habits - he seemed to spend an awful lot of time making up special names for different types of people and seemed to just skim over the impact of any future shocks on the economy - I think the programme was light on economics and heavy on shots of McWilliams poncing around in his 06 Saab rehashing his book (which I haven't read so I may be doing him a disservice).

That said I enjoyed watching it (and despite what i said above I am a bit of a fan of McWilliams; I still think he was the best morning show presenter that Newstalk had), I laughed out loud a good bit and thought some of his people groupings were very good - maybe the next two shows will look at the potential problems in more depth.


----------



## Glenbhoy (7 Nov 2006)

I didn't watch it, because I too had a feeling it might be based on the book.  I bought the book allbeit as the 3rd book in a 3 for 2 offer, I thought it might do for light entertainment on my holiday flights - I struggled through Chapter 1, then defeated and disgusted with myself for adding to the man's fortune, I closed the book.


----------



## Markjbloggs (7 Nov 2006)

One point he made last night was about the amazing productivity gains in Ireland over the past few years - if I remember correctly, he said it was double that of the EU.  

Is this true - I remember seeing data a few years ago that suggested that the increase in Irish GDP tracked linearly with the increase in population ie.  there was no productivity increase associated with the Celtic Tiger, gains in the economy were directly as a result of adding more people.  

 Or it might make sense if it is based on house price inflation - it takes the same number of people to build a 1500 square feet house as it did 5 years ago, only the price has doubled


----------



## bogwarrior (7 Nov 2006)

Markjbloggs said:


> One point he made last night was about the amazing productivity gains in Ireland over the past few years - if I remember correctly, he said it was double that of the EU.
> 
> Is this true - I remember seeing data a few years ago that suggested that the increase in Irish GDP tracked linearly with the increase in population ie.  there was no productivity increase associated with the Celtic Tiger, gains in the economy were directly as a result of adding more people.
> 
> Or it might make sense if it is based on house price inflation - it takes the same number of people to build a 1500 square feet house as it did 5 years ago, only the price has doubled



I have often wondered about this too.  we know that some (many?) multinationals declare profits here that were generated overseas to avail of our lower taxes.  I assume this increases our GDP while not necessarily making us any more productive.
He claimed we work the most hours in the EU, but that doesn't necessarily mean we're more productive either.


----------



## Chamar (7 Nov 2006)

TarfHead said:


> The book and the Tv programme have the same author & the same name - yet some posters are critical that they were similar ?
> 
> What were you expecting  ?



For me, it's not that the content was a surprise, rather RTE basically commissioned a 3-part serialisation of his book and I don't really agree with that. I mean, I was surprised David McW didn't turn to the camera and say something along the lines of 'my book, "The Pope's Children" discusses this in more detail and is available at all good bookstores for E9.99'. Also, when I hear all these attempts to 'coin phrases' like 'decklanders', 'kells angels' etc. etc. I can't help but think he is desperate to apply some sort of dublin wit in explaining economics and that just turns me off. Like I said, I think he needs to come up with something new.


----------



## mo3art (7 Nov 2006)

Honestly I thought it was pure rubbish, and I won't be watching the rest in the series.
Yet another load of drivel from the makers of "30 things...."  which was _such a satire on the irish republic_, what a waste of the tax payers money.


----------



## annR (8 Nov 2006)

I hadn't read the book so was fairly interested.  I agree the style of the program was a bit too noisy and busy but I have to say - I would watch him any day over Eddie Hobbs and a lot of people thought Eddie Hobbs was worth watching!  Ah it's interesting enough simply cos what's happened in this country could do with some insight and discussion.  Fair play to him.  I'll probably watch it again.


----------



## micamaca (8 Nov 2006)

I enjoyed the programme too. I haven't read too much of David McWilliams or bought his book (yet) so maybe that helped.  I didn't listen to him on Newstalk as I love the Morning Ireland show, I think they were on at the same time.  I found the script funny, entertaining...had a good laugh at the people in Donnybrook and their cars, how the Popes children came to be  and so on.  It was a light programme about Ireland's economy and maybe too light for people who are already very clued in. Perhaps it was just an intro and he'll get to the nitty gritty next week.  I'll watch it next week as I found it entertaining, maybe not as informative as it could have been, but very entertaining.


----------



## delboy159 (8 Nov 2006)

I'm surprised at some peoples negative reactions to the programme.  

It was very informative, without being bogged down like many other economic programmes.  It put a tongue in cheek slant on how many people live their lives.

I found the music and camera work fine.  Especially some of the background music that was taking the p*ss out of scenarios.  The American Beauty theme was hilarious, myself and a mate instantly said it was a pity he couldn't have managed to get a Ford Focus in every driveway - ala Kevin and Perry... 

The stuff he's trying to quantify is pretty messy - he made a very good stab at it. His economic arguements are sound and he did back them up with economic data and entertaining case studies. However, when he gets into the social classing and old hibernia v's modern thinking he does drift into grey areas - but to be honest these areas are what really make you think!

The friend I watched it with and myself brought the programme up in both our offices yesterday - not a single person had watched it or even had an opinion on one or two of his points that we brought up....  Just shows the picture he painted of lemmings looking for our prestige cars, decking, 70 hour weeks, red bull on the way into work and a bottle of wine when you get home isn't far from the reality when you hop the ball in a modern day work environment!


----------



## Betsy Og (8 Nov 2006)

Is he really telling us anything that "features" writers dont put in the papers on a regular basis?

Newsflash:
People have long commutes
People enjoy spending their new wealth - theres some conspicuous consumption
Quality of life has deteriorated for long commuters working long hours
etc.

All the above are very obvious and me & mates have been talking about them for years - that why we've all left the greater Dublin area (all non-Dubs).

McWilliams seems to think that trying to coin some clever phrase for the bleedin' obvious makes him a social commentator/economist extraordinare. His one definitive claim is his clucking that the sky is falling in on the property market & its going to crash. Sure it you stick to a slogan for long enough it may well eventually come to pass - but after, say, 10 years from his first revelation to the public that the property market is doomed will he admit he was premature/incorrect on that one.


----------



## Markjbloggs (8 Nov 2006)

delboy159 said:


> I found the music and camera work fine. !


 
Was it just me or was the intro music a knock-off of the Devo 1970's pre-punk classic, Mongoloid?

Showing my age.....


----------



## edo (8 Nov 2006)

> cWilliams seems to think that trying to coin some clever phrase for the bleedin' obvious makes him a social commentator/economist extraordinare. His one definitive claim is his clucking that the sky is falling in on the property market & its going to crash. Sure it you stick to a slogan for long enough it may well eventually come to pass - but after, say, 10 years from his first revelation to the public that the property market is doomed will he admit he was premature/incorrect on that one.


I dont know if its just me , but I have been following McWilliams articles in the papers and other media for quite some time now and I have yet to find one instance where he has actually said that property prices are going to fall ,in 2002,2003 ,2004 etc etc. Actually the only comentators who have been calling the market for the immediate 12 months have tended to be from the more bullish sectors.

 Even the Economist - who stated that Irish Property was overvalued by 15-20% didn't state it believed the market would fall - it was just stating concern and its belief that the market was overvalued. just because the sky didn't fall immediately upon this pronouncent doesn't mean its validity was incorrect.In a speculative bubble the hardest thing to predict is not that it will burst( once asset price and yield get that much out of kilter its a given) but when it will burst.

 Seeing as there appears to be a slight stalling in the market at the mo - Im not sure I'd be feeling so darn smug about slagging off McWilliams for predictions that he has never made - I am quite prepared to be corrected on this - with some solid evidence folks .

 he has ,without doubt articulated ,extremely well in my opinion , the rise and rise of the property phenomeneon and how it has been enabled by the ready supply of cheap money from an economists point of view and more importantly how this massive diversion of investment into bricks and mortar from productive sectors of the economy is leaving us extremely vulnerable to the vissitudes of the Global market. This is extremely important - as rates go up and money supply tightens we will have to fall back on that old fashioned way of gaining cash - working for it and for a small open economy like our own that means exports.

 As 87% of the value of our exports come from software,electronics and pharamceuticals - all owned by foreign multinationals - the worrying thing for the future is that all 3 of these industries are gradually moving their centres of production to the Far east and Indian sub continent where China and India are pumping out millions of well educated graduates a year who will work in this industry for a % of the average manufacturing wage in Ireland , let alone the average salary in the Public service , Construction, or financial sectors - all massively dependant on German pensioners loaned money for their existence. if even say 10% of investment in Property had been pushed in the direction of our indigneous R/D sector our prospects for the future would seen a hell of a lot better .

 It probably wont radically effect anybody coming to the end of their working days now or the next few years but the for all those coming after it will be critical. In that regard I give McWilliams great credit for consistently highlighting this and the consistent historical folly of putting consumption (I place property in that category) before real investment , An argument he has been making for the last 5 years - something the Gov have only recently woken up too and are slowy getting their butts in gear to address.


----------



## bazermc (8 Nov 2006)

Anybody know what age McWilliams is?  I am guessing about 40ish!


----------



## annR (8 Nov 2006)

Actually the other thing I liked about the program was his pretty good attempt at having a conversation in Irish with the lady in the Gaelschool.  His Irish wasn't bad at all for someone who is obviously not a native speaker.


----------



## joe sod (8 Nov 2006)

I watched the show too and have followed McWilliams articles in the sunday business post for the last few years. He is excellent in print and has flagged these issues for the last 5 years. In fact he was probably the first to point up the deficiencies in the irish success story. However I thought George Lees Boom show was much better and to the point. Eddie Hobbs rip off republic was also better and more entertaining. David Mcwilliams has that irritating habit because of his south dublin backround of not being able to talk as an irishman but more as a south dubliner. His reference to macaroon bars and not being able to buy curly wurlys he saw on UTV was typical south dublin. I also agree that his categorisation of people as "decklanders" and "popes children" does not work. Its as if he is trying to say following George Lees program and Eddie Hobbs program "ME TOO"


----------



## TarfHead (8 Nov 2006)

joe sod said:


> His reference to macaroon bars and not being able to buy curly wurlys he saw on UTV ..


 
I'm a couple of years older than him and cannot remember not being able to buy curly-wurlys - maybe they were only unavailable in The Borough  ?

I do remember looking forward to visiting the Woolworths sweet counter in Derry on the way home from Donegal because of all the unfamilar brands (Caramac, Munchies, Mintolas .. mmmmmmmm), but Curly Wurly was not one of them.
The mot was reared in Co. Waterford and she too remembers Curly Wurlys from her earliest days.


----------



## annR (8 Nov 2006)

Yeah I thought that was a bit silly - relying on that to make his point.  It nearly seemed like it was some kind of inside joke which no one else really got.
I am a dedicated south Dublin watcher and as they go I thought he wasn't too bad.  And like I said fair play for having a stab at the Irish.

I do think that he could stray outside of the Dublin commuter belt to examine the terrible chaos happening in towns all over the country.


----------



## Guest127 (8 Nov 2006)

thought curly wurlys were made in coolock!  but as a native of dundalk I do know where hes coming from. used to kill us to see childer in newry buying a comic for 2p and we had to pay 6p. and the choice of sweets they had. and I know newry is only down the road but there was no cars in those days and a trip to newry was only once every 3 months or so. mostly to buy clothes in the market. what about his comment on a nuclear plant for this country in the future? I have stated elsewhere that IMO its a option open to us that we will have to look at carefully. this NIMBY attitude will have to stop too. if UK, France, US and Finland to name a few didnt have nuclear power plants what cost would oil be today?


----------



## Gordanus (9 Nov 2006)

edo said:


> tho to give the guy his credit he is pretty much the only one out there trying to make a fist of trying to explain the last 15 years or so (there is a distinct lack of commentary both verbal or otherwise on this - wonder why?)



We're too busy enjoying it and being smug about it - ah the luck of the Irish - to look into the causes, none of which have a lot to do with any deliberately adopted strategies, but rather a combination of selling out to the multinationals and circumstances.   It is a phenomenon which really does bear close scrutiny, especially if we don't want a recession to hit us with equal speed.........


----------



## Markjbloggs (10 Nov 2006)

Gordanus said:


> We're too busy enjoying it and being smug about it - ah the luck of the Irish - to look into the causes, none of which have a lot to do with any deliberately adopted strategies, but rather a combination of selling out to the multinationals and circumstances. It is a phenomenon which really does bear close scrutiny, especially if we don't want a recession to hit us with equal speed.........


 
I 100% agree - the country has been very lucky.  Looking back, my impressions are that the ball started rolling with the "cap-in-hand" phase in the early 90's , where Irish politicians went to Brussels to get as much as possible out of the EU. The next phase was the Technology boom in the mid-late 90's, a purely US phenomenon which Ireland benefitted hugely from through the presence of low corporate tax seeking multi-nationals.  After the Nasdaq collapse in 2000 and the post 9/11 low interest rate environment, focus switched to property and the boom we are in now.

Does anyone else see these 3 phases?  Are there any definitive histories of the Celtic tiger that explores these issues?


----------



## TarfHead (10 Nov 2006)

Hmm, either Malcolm Gladwell is reading David McWilliams, or vice-versa, or maybe it's just obvious to those who can see.

http://www.malcolmgladwell.com/2006/2006_05_29_a_risk.html#

"_But, as the Harvard economists David Bloom and David Canning suggest in their study of the "Celtic Tiger," of greater importance may have been a singular demographic fact. In 1979, restrictions on contraception that had been in place since Ireland's founding were lifted, and the birth rate began to fall. In 1970, the average Irishwoman had 3.9 children. By the mid-nineteen-nineties, that number was less than two. As a result, when the Irish children born in the nineteen-sixties hit the workforce, there weren't a lot of children in the generation just behind them. Ireland was suddenly free of the enormous social cost of supporting and educating and caring for a large dependent population. It was like a family of four in which, all of a sudden, the elder child is old enough to take care of her little brother and the mother can rejoin the workforce. Overnight, that family doubles its number of breadwinners and becomes much better off._"


----------



## nlgbbbblth (11 Nov 2006)

I think it's one thing for McWilliams to say that people have decking or eat breakfast rolls; it's quite another to say that those things define the person, which is essentially what he is doing.

.......or reducing another group of real people with hope, fears and emotions to a clicky buzz word so it doesn't feel so bad when you dismiss them all.

Condescending and dismissive crap.


----------



## liteweight (11 Nov 2006)

nlgbbbblth said:


> I think it's one thing for McWilliams to say that people have decking or eat breakfast rolls; it's quite another to say that those things define the person, which is essentially what he is doing.
> 
> .......or reducing another group of real people with hope, fears and emotions to a clicky buzz word so it doesn't feel so bad when you dismiss them all.
> 
> Condescending and dismissive crap.



Very good points. I don't think he particularly meant to be condescending however. There's a tendency to look to the past in Ireland...."it's far from latte you were reared" type of attitude! Well my children don't remember a time when it wasn't available so it's the norm for them. If we never moved on we'd still be living in the era of pigs in the kitchen, which is the way some Americans still view us.


----------



## Gordanus (12 Nov 2006)

Since when didn't stereotyping sell?


----------



## demoivre (13 Nov 2006)

edo said:


> I dont know if its just me , but I have been following McWilliams articles in the papers and other media for quite some time now and I have yet to find one instance where he has actually said that property prices are going to fall ,in 2002,2003 ,2004 etc etc. Actually the only comentators who have been calling the market for the immediate 12 months have tended to be from the more bullish sectors.



Odd then that he has a Poll on his homepage asking " Is David wrong about an Irish property crash? " I totally concur with what Liam Collins said about McWilliams in  yesterday's Sunday Independent.


----------



## Marie M (13 Nov 2006)

nlgbbbblth said:


> I think it's one thing for McWilliams to say that people have decking or eat breakfast rolls; it's quite another to say that those things define the person, which is essentially what he is doing.
> 
> .......or reducing another group of real people with hope, fears and emotions to a clicky buzz word so it doesn't feel so bad when you dismiss them all.
> 
> Condescending and dismissive crap.



I find it condescending and insulting, mainly because myself and quite a few family and friends fit into some of his "funny" stereotypes, did he come up with any sarcastic cartoon character for himself?


----------



## Wilkes (13 Nov 2006)

Whether David McWilliams called or didn't call a property correction right, whether he did or didn't call the economy, The Celtic Tiger or whether you like or don't like him isn't the main point I think. The facts are that he is challenging and provides an alternative view to the mainstream commentator and subsequently leads to debate. I like him as both a person and a writer even though sometimes he grates on the senses so I'll watch tonight for the same reason along with over 500,000 other viewers.

You can't expect to like everything about a TV personality or agree with all their opinions, but at least you can respect the man for putting himself out there. I much prefer having the likes of Mc Williams, Lee, Hobbs, Mc Dowell, Gurdgiev and others on the box than boring commentators that never challenge either themselves or the status quo.


----------



## Betsy Og (14 Nov 2006)

Watched last night, had missed the first one.

It was okish, very padded, the 7 stage property theory was interesting. As posters mentioned below theres a very condescending tone to his widespread categorisation of people. 

2 instances in particular last night:
a) when the light was fading and he showed happy decklander with his impressive deck and McW's tone was very sarcastic. Myself and herself turned to each other & said "So whats wrong with that then?".
b) talking about Johnstown near Navan, in self important tones, "Take a good look at it, because in 20 years time this is what Ireland will be like" (or words to that effect). But there was no conclusion. So David, is it a good thing or a bad thing? Does it mean Meath will dominate Lenister football again or will it be joyriding on the back roads of Meath??

And then the closing sequence - "the property market, its up to you the Irish people". So what do you want us to do, precipitate the crash??, keep the thing going??

I think the tester q is do you advise someone to buy now or hold off for the crash? I think you'd say buy for own use, not for speculation, "stress test" for a another couple of % interest rate increase. 

Interesting programme but lots of grating guff and a distinct lack of conclusions.


----------



## Purple (14 Nov 2006)

Well summed up Betsy Og.
Lots of style but very little substance. It was like someone reading the headings of a presentation without the text below.


----------



## homeowner (14 Nov 2006)

edo said:


> I dont know if its just me , but I have been following McWilliams articles in the papers and other media for quite some time now and I have yet to find one instance where he has actually said that property prices are going to fall ,in 2002,2003 ,2004 etc etc. Actually the only comentators who have been calling the market for the immediate 12 months have tended to be from the more bullish sectors.



Well i cant quote exact articles, but i too have been reading his work since around 2000 and I can assure you he has been saying that the property market will crash.  His main points that he repeats over and over are to do with comparisons with Japan and boom-bust cycles.  I distinctly remember him saying in 2000 (i am paraphrasing here) - if prices keep going the way they are, a 1 bed apt in dublin will cost a quarter of a million (£IR) and that just cant happen - well it did happen and then some.

He has been constantly saying it cant last and the bubble will burst any day now citing other countries as an example.  He may not have said the words  - "it will callopse on the 10th Oct 2007"  but I think that is why people have such a problem with him, because if you say something for long enough, there is a good chance it will occur eventually.  

Its easy to look back on the past 7 years and give your theories as to why things were the way they were, predicting it is another ball game entirely and in my opinion that is where McWilliams falls down.  He hasnt correctly predicted a bust at all, he just keeps repeating the same statistics over and over. He will then claim he was right.  But he has been wrong for the past 6 years insofar that he cant say when the "bust" will happen, it has confounded all the economists and it keeps proving them wrong.  But thats not to say it wont happen at all.

Having said that I am a fan and I do like reading his articles, he is thought provoking if nothing else.


----------



## Chamar (14 Nov 2006)

I didn't agree last night when he said that apart from what is happening with property that there isn't really a lot going on in the Irish economy. What about all the FDI we have got?

However, people do need reminding of what has and can happen in places like Japan. It is really staggering to think that 20 years ago Japan was predicted to overtake the US but ended up in mess you couldn't believe possible for an advanced economy what with years and years of deflation, property crash, 0% interest rates, banks collapsing etc. etc. I mean, what makes Ireland so special that it can't happen here?


----------



## DrMoriarty (14 Nov 2006)

I thought Liam Fay's review in the Culture section of the _Sunday Chimes_ was pretty good. I don't think I'd particularly _like_ Fay if I met him, but he does a great line in 'scathing'...


> Rarely before has a commentator probed so deeply in the proverbial mine of useless information.


----------



## annR (14 Nov 2006)

Betsy Og said:


> Watched last night, had missed the first one.
> b) talking about Johnstown near Navan, in self important tones, "Take a good look at it, because in 20 years time this is what Ireland will be like" (or words to that effect). But there was no conclusion. So David, is it a good thing or a bad thing? Does it mean Meath will dominate Lenister football again or will it be joyriding on the back roads of Meath??
> .


 
I didn't really take this in a condescending way.  Indeed whatever way he said it, I think he's basically right - we should always have a good look around us and thinking about fact that this is the world/suburb/environment our kids will come out of.

I also think he is right not to offer a conclusion.  The aim is to be thought provoking so it's better left open.  No one knows all the answers anyway not even David.

I thought the foreign investment bit was good with the Irish developer building this massive 5 star resort in Bulgaria and bussing over Irish people to invest.  Is it really as crazy as he made it look?


----------



## Betsy Og (14 Nov 2006)

I suppose my point is that without conclusion or insight then is it merely statements of the obvious?

So we learn that many people live in Navan, dunno about you but I'd gathered that anyway. So what does that mean to me/the country? 

Not that David gave any comment but I'd guess its a necessity due to house prices in Dublin and it can/does lead to commuter chaos and reduced quality of life to those who must work in Dublin. I can pick up a paper any day to tell me that.


----------



## Art (14 Nov 2006)

homeowner said:


> His main points that he repeats over and over are to do with comparisons with Japan and boom-bust cycles.


 
I clearly remember listening to him on the Late Late back in early 2001 around the time I bought a house that has since nearly tripled in value. At that stage he was comparing Ireland to Massachusetts and predicting a similar property crash for Ireland as had happened there. I note that there has been no mention of Massachusetts in his two programmes so far and that he has now moved onto Japan.

If McWilliams was right about the crash in 2001 and is right again now then house prices would have to fall significantly below their 2001 levels.


----------



## Markjbloggs (14 Nov 2006)

Art said:


> homeowner said:
> 
> 
> > His main points that he repeats over and over are to do with comparisons with Japan and boom-bust cycles. quote]
> ...


----------



## davidoco (14 Nov 2006)

Chamar said:


> However, people do need reminding of what has and can happen in places like Japan. It is really staggering to think that 20 years ago Japan was predicted to overtake the US but ended up in mess you couldn't believe possible for an advanced economy what with years and years of deflation, property crash, 0% interest rates, banks collapsing etc. etc. I mean, what makes Ireland so special that it can't happen here?



Economies can and do recover.  I remember being in Hawaii in 2004 and there was a shopping centre exclusively reserved for Japanese only!  

http://www.economist.com/theworldin/asia/displayStory.cfm?story_id=5133348&d=2006

PS Decklander had a beautiful deck, large back garden, and a stream running through his garden – there are no semi-ds on Daft like that.


----------



## Art (14 Nov 2006)

Markjbloggs said:


> Art said:
> 
> 
> > In a sense, he was blindsided by these events, but his theses (ie property bust) still holds true. IT WILL HAPPEN. The uncertainty is in the timing.
> ...


----------



## CharlieC (14 Nov 2006)

Slightly off-topic- anyone know where the Norman castle featured in programme was. Had a bet that it is in West Limerick


----------



## Markjbloggs (14 Nov 2006)

Art said:


> Markjbloggs said:
> 
> 
> > I accept that. However why has he not acknowledged that he was wrong back then due to factors he could not have foreseen. Why has he also stopped referring to Massachusetts if it was such a valid basis for comparison in 2001? Also are you saying that you agree with him that prices will fall below 2001 levels?
> ...


----------



## TarfHead (14 Nov 2006)

demoivre said:


> I totally concur with what Liam Collins said about McWilliams in yesterday's Sunday Independent.


 
I eventually found that article on unison, thanks to a link on Wikipedia.

Wow, saucer of milk for Liam Collins

"_There is an old maxim in journalism (and business) that you should never knock another man's racket_" .. but I'm going to give him a good kicking anyway ..


----------



## Art (14 Nov 2006)

Markjbloggs said:


> Now, ask yourself, are these two characteristics at play here in Ireland?????


 
I do accept that there will be a correction in Irish house prices. I am just not so sure that there will be a crash. 

What I am questioning is the credibility of David McWilliams given 

1)that he has been so wrong before, 
2)that he has failed to point out that his earlier predictons were incorrect 
3) that he has not acknowledged that no matter what happens, prices will not crash below their 2001 levels. If he is correct prices should revert to what they were in 1995


----------



## ubiquitous (14 Nov 2006)

Art said:


> ... no matter what happens, prices will not crash below their 2001 levels.



This eventuality may be highly unlikely but is surely not impossible?


----------



## Markjbloggs (14 Nov 2006)

ubiquitous said:


> This eventuality may be highly unlikely but is surely not impossible?


 

Exactly. Anything can happen.


----------



## homeowner (14 Nov 2006)

Markjbloggs said:


> 1. For a bubble to happen (stocks, real estate, tulips etc) , one of the key ingredients is the complicity of authorities - be they the Minister for Finance, the Federal Reserve, The Central Bank etc.
> 2. Many bubbles are also characterised by leverage, easy access to large amounts of money, which is then used by ordinary people to inflate asset prices.
> 
> Now, ask yourself, are these two characteristics at play here in Ireland?????



I dont think anyone here is saying that the property market will continue to grow at the rate it has in the past 8 years or that there will not be some sort of slowing down or soft landing or whatever you want to call it.

I think the point is that McWilliams, for all his commentary on the subject seems to be only talking about what _has _happened and the fact that Ireland is just folllowing predictable economic trends that have occured in other countries.  But anyone with knowledge of economics can tell you that.  

I would be more interested in him expanding on why he thinks there will be a crash and when he thinks it will happen.  Anything he has said on that subject to date has been wrong because he has been saying it for years.  Like another poster said, I would have more respect for him if he admitted he got it wrong 6 years ago as he couldnt predict interest rates etc.....


----------



## Art (14 Nov 2006)

ubiquitous said:


> This eventuality may be highly unlikely but is surely not impossible?


 
Of course nothing is impossible - it is also not impossible that house prices will continue to increase as they have since 2001. 

Therefore you are quite right that a crash to 1995 levels is highly unlikely. It is also highly unlikely that prices will keep going up as they have since 2001. 

Either way it is highly likely that Mc Williams was incorrect in 2001 when he said that properties would crash from the levels they were at then and return to their 1995 pre boom levels.


----------



## edo (14 Nov 2006)

homeowner said:


> I dont think anyone here is saying that the property market will continue to grow at the rate it has in the past 8 years or that there will not be some sort of slowing down or soft landing or whatever you want to call it.
> 
> I think the point is that McWilliams, for all his commentary on the subject seems to be only talking about what _has _happened and the fact that Ireland is just folllowing predictable economic trends that have occured in other countries. But anyone with knowledge of economics can tell you that.
> 
> I would be more interested in him expanding on why he thinks there will be a crash and when he thinks it will happen. Anything he has said on that subject to date has been wrong because he has been saying it for years. Like another poster said, I would have more respect for him if he admitted he got it wrong 6 years ago as he couldnt predict interest rates etc.....



For all the self appointed expert economists on the thread:

 heres McWilliams mea culpa - go knock yourselves out  

[broken link removed]


----------



## ludermor (14 Nov 2006)

This is taken from his online chat

*Tom Power*: How many times during the past decade did you forecast the imminent collapse of house prices?
*David:* Hi Tom. You're absolutely spot on. I have been wrong on this since 2000 odd. I didn't expect Germany to stay in a recession so long and therefore didn't expect our interest rates to stay so low for so long.


----------



## Wilkes (14 Nov 2006)

Had my attention drawn to this, the very close similarities between Bobo in Paradise published several years before In Search of the Popes Children. For those of us who rated David Mcwilliams as an original thinker this comes as a shock but maybe he'll explain. EDO seems to know the author quite well. This is a review on Amazon;

"Remarkably similar to David Brooks's 2000 study, Bobos in Paradise -- The New Upper Class And How They Got There. In fact, a recent article in Ireland on Sunday went so far as to quesion whether McWilliams is the new copycat of the Celtic Tiger! 

For example:
McWilliams writes of a new social class he calls HiCos, Hibernian Cosmopolitans disappointed that the social revolutions they supported in the 1970s, '80s and '90s led to mass consumerism rather than radical political change. 
The Bobos -- Bourgeois Bohemians -- (from Brooks's book) fret about the same things as the HiCos. Both are seeking new spiritual paths, rejecting Judaeo-Christian worship and looking instead for New Age solutions to fill the aching void that rampant materialism has corroded into their souls, and each is appalled by the vulgarity of the class below. For the Bobo, that is Patio Man; for the HiCo, it is DIY Declan, a citizen of Deckland, McWilliams's catch-all name for anonymous satellite towns where garden decking is the ultimate sign you have arrived. 
DIY Declan sees Woodie's as his temple -- which makes him a very close cousin of Patio Man, who feels the same about Home Depot. 
And they are aspirational in very similar ways. For Brooks, that means they crave monstrous refrigerators and 'slate shower stalls'; for McWilliams, it means they crave monstrous refrigerators and 'slate wet-rooms' 
In leafy US suburbs, Brooks found that so many blue delivery bags containing the New York Times lay on suburban lawns that the bags were visible from outer space. McWilliams decides that, along with the Great Wall of China, Christmas decorations in Celbridge gardens are the only things that can be seen with the naked eye from space. 
It goes on. For Brooks, lifestyle magazines like Conde Nast Traveler are the new pornography. For McWilliams, The Irish Times Thursday supplement is 'property porn'.

Both are amused by the language of recruitment advertising; by the way that we have all embraced artisan breads; by how we drink machiatos and lattes instead of just 'coffee'.

They offer new names for the bars we have raised on our own expectations -- Brooks has an Achieveatron, while McWilliams invents an Attainometer. 
And both love the wedding announcement pages. Brooks talks of The New York Times, where 'a Duke MBA who works at NationsBank marries a Michigan law grad who works at Winston and Strawn'. McWilliams, in the Irish Times, finds that 'lawyer beds down with doctor, AIB marries Anglo-Irish' etc -- and both guffaw at the fact that the engagement announcements are known among the monied classes as the Mergers and Acquisitions Page. *The similarities in the two books are astounding. The only significant difference is that Brooks's book was published in 2000 while McWilliams published his book in 2005.
*


----------



## homeowner (14 Nov 2006)

Wilkes said:


> Had my attention drawn to this, the very close similarities between Bobo in Paradise published several years before In Search of the Popes Children. For those of us who rated David Mcwilliams as an original thinker this comes as a shock but maybe he'll explain. EDO seems to know the author quite well.



Brilliant! Patio Man. BoBo.  Home Depot.  
I'll never read DMcW's articles in the same light again.  What a rip-off.


----------



## legend99 (14 Nov 2006)

Thats from Diarmuid Doyles article in the Tribune last Sunday. He manages to make McWilliams look like a bit of a cogger!



Wilkes said:


> Had my attention drawn to this, the very close similarities between Bobo in Paradise published several years before In Search of the Popes Children. For those of us who rated David Mcwilliams as an original thinker this comes as a shock but maybe he'll explain. EDO seems to know the author quite well. This is a review on Amazon;
> 
> "Remarkably similar to David Brooks's 2000 study, Bobos in Paradise -- The New Upper Class And How They Got There. In fact, a recent article in Ireland on Sunday went so far as to quesion whether McWilliams is the new copycat of the Celtic Tiger!
> 
> ...


----------



## Henny Penny (14 Nov 2006)

I think he raised an interesting point about people mortgaging their homes to buy property abroad ... and how big a risk this might actually be ... if the foreign market bottoms out and they can't sell their property.


----------



## edo (14 Nov 2006)

Wilkes said:


> Had my attention drawn to this, the very close similarities between Bobo in Paradise published several years before In Search of the Popes Children. For those of us who rated David Mcwilliams as an original thinker this comes as a shock but maybe he'll explain. EDO seems to know the author quite well. This is a review on Amazon;
> 
> "Remarkably similar to David Brooks's 2000 study, Bobos in Paradise -- The New Upper Class And How They Got There. In fact, a recent article in Ireland on Sunday went so far as to quesion whether McWilliams is the new copycat of the Celtic Tiger!



Whoah! - Sorry to disappoint you - I dont know the man at all - he's got a good 5 to 7 years on me at least - put it this way - he was working on the Central banks input to the Mass treaty at the same time I was doing my finals in Belfield. He proceeded to go work in the City in London for the rest of nineties and I swanned around Japan , the US and middle east building up my "portfolio career" in that same time. Nah - Im just an apolitical humble Logistics and operations manager for an Irish Capital equipment manufacturer and exporter - Dont move in the same circles at all at all - Perfect Deckland material as my bank manager keeps intimating everytime he tries get me to purchase a mortgage when I drop in for a far more simple transaction! 

I would definitely agree that McWilliams" In search of the popes children" owes more than a little to Brooks" Bobos in Paradise" when comes to style - tho If you have read the book - which I have and would be definitely recommend as a very funny sarcastic look at the "liberal establishment" in Blue State America during their period of self doubt at the growing conservative ascendency in dotcom Bubble America - on substance and subject they are quite different - McWilliams delves far more into the economics behind the Tiger - Brooks goes far more into the culture wars and a certain view of america , guaranteed to raise the ire of his chief audience , the readers of the New York Times in which he has a regular column in the OP-ED Pages , an outsider / insider role in which he revels - a smart elequent satirist who should be one of us ,who knows us only too well and we can't dismiss thim as crackpot or loony like Limbaugh, Buchanan or Coulter. Something McWilliams shares with him , given the amount of invective and bitchy articles that poured forth from the media aristocracy in the broadsheets over the weekend - which to be perfectly honest is good old Irish Begrudgery at this bright chap who comes from nowhere , in the view of the closed world of the Media Broadsheet elite , makes the one good programme that TV3 has produced in its entire existence , has the balls to actually write a bestselling book on the Celtic Tiger, and makes a whimsical, provocative TV programme on same , drawing in Late Late Show size viewing audiences and becoming the topic of conversation for the last week or so. Something none of the naysayers has yet to do - if ever they will - much more fun and safer to stay with the herd and do the criticising than step up to the plate yourself. 

As I have stated in my first post on this thread on this thread - its on a page one actually, I do have my disagreements with some of the stuff that he comes up with, and for me , George Lees more understated Boom was a far better study on the Tiger. But when you pull back and leave aside the decklanders and hi-cos and all the flashy photography the message is exactly the same as Lees and both of them have been saying it for the same length of time - We're losing the run of ourselves here and in the end we're going to pay for it. Economics isn't called the dismal imperfect science for nothing - but like gravity - nobody, country or civilization can remain impervious to pendulum of economic cycles and supply and demand - history is littered with Booms and Busts ,everyone of them had proclaimed that they had managed to defeat economic gravity - they were postponing the inevitiable - what goes around comes around. 

I've lived thru 2 of them - as mentioned elsewhere on AAM - I began my productive working life in Japan in the early 90s - spent 2 and a bit years there working for a Japanese multinational. Once the Bubble burst a 2 bed Apt outside Yokohama which would have cost 500.000e in 1992 was selling for between 180 and 200.000e in 1994 and prices fell for a solid 10 years folks. This in a country that was still one of the most competitive economies, the world largest exporter during the same period - interest rates were close to zero for most of this period - they are still less than 2% as I write . Japan also has a shortage of building space and large population. And Still prices fell ,the services sector fell to pieces and the many banks failed or were put into cold storage and on life support by the Government which borrowed trillions to keep some liquidity in the system and prevent total collapse. All because of a mania for property which left the real world about 5-6 years before the crash.

Now take a look at dear old ireland. only 4% of our land is urbanised - the least in Europe . Our export industry has remained static or contracting with a few little upward blips here and there for the last years. 87% is owned by folks who have little concern for the price of a house in Kinnegad and the profits they make leave this country for even more tax friendly climes - if the US government ,now controlled in part by a more protectionist leaning Democratic party, feels that they would prefer that the jobs came home aswell as the profits I would start to feel distinctly queasy. We have no indigenous export industry worth talking about and Im in the Hi tech export industry. If the property market goes south , dont be depending on the old celtic tiger to come to the rescue - its dead - our competiveness being wiped out by cost of actually trying to live in the place. The whole show is running on vast amounts of borrowed money - its our biggest import. There is a dark clould on the horizon. unlike a lot of the now departed bears here - I have always felt that late 2007 /2008 will see big changes - it takes time to build traction - but all the elements are coming together for a bad one - an all but certain US recession , only question is how bad - Im worried - my immediate job prospects rely on Mr and Mrs Smith in Des Moines Iowa going out to buy computer and electrical durables next year ,in the largest quantities possible so I can dream about a payrise -( been on freeze for last 12 months and its a barrel of laughs in Manufacturing here), a steadily improving european economy which will bring interest rates back up something approaching normal 5-7% and a growing realization that we have just been paying way too much for a very modest "asset" - The elements are there , but because bubble growth is irrational - its impossible to call when it peaks and don't for a minute believe it will be any less irrational on the way down the other side

Im Done


----------



## Hibernicatio (14 Nov 2006)

Excellent Edo!!


----------



## rabbit (14 Nov 2006)

I remember in the early nineties some people forecasting how a recession was around the corner and how the day may come when the govt would not be able to pay the dole.   We owed tens of billions in foreign debt then.   Come to think of it, despite all the handouts from the EC, we still do...


----------



## Wilkes (15 Nov 2006)

Thank you Edo, as a fan of his work its good to learn that he has not just done a copy of Bobo. BTW I couldn't agree more with the assessment of the reaction.It was entirely in keeping with past behaviour. Fay is the classic, such poison and bile week in week out, it must be awfulf being so cynical, always assuming the worst in people. Much of the stuff leads to truly depressing reading to be honest.


----------



## Markjbloggs (15 Nov 2006)

Excellent post, Edo - seems like you have a similar perspective to myself, having spent a bit of time abroad.


----------



## homeowner (15 Nov 2006)

Great points Edo.  I just have one comment on the land issue:



edo said:


> Now take a look at dear old ireland. only 4% of our land is urbanised - the least in Europe .
> Im Done



Dublin has no space left to build and there is not an awful lot of work outside Dublin.  I would move out to a cheaper part of the country if I could find a job like the one I have.  I also would be reluctant to give up the (few) benefits of living in a capital like decent shopping, restaurants, theaters, concerts, etc....  

I have toyed with the idea of moving to the west but I just could not stand life with a the lack of facilities (however crap they are in dublin) that I like having around me.  To me that is "worth" paying a premium for in Dublin and there are alot of people out there that think like I do.  Until such a time as there is a motorway network linking all the major cities to Dublin and each other, people have very little choice but to pay the extortionate prices for houses in and around dublin and that is one factor that keeps the prices high.  As to how much of a factor it is in keeping the market up, I dont know.


----------



## ubiquitous (15 Nov 2006)

homeowner said:


> Dublin has no space left to build.



I don't agree. Look at any aerial photo or map of Dublin and you will be amazed by the scale of unused and/or green space within a few miles of the city centre. For example Dublin port and its environs take up several hundred acres of land that is currently used for low return warehousing and storage yards. There is no reason why the port cannot be relocated and this and other unnecessary green space and brownfield sites utilised for residential housing. 

The potential for higher density construction within the city centre alone is limitless. Walk a few hundred yards north of O'Connell Street for example and you will come across streets of single storey and two-storey housing. There is no reason why these (and similar areas) cannot be demolished, making way for large scale multistorey developments.


----------



## Vanilla (15 Nov 2006)

homeowner said:


> I also would be reluctant to give up the (few) benefits of living in a capital like decent shopping, restaurants, theaters, concerts, etc....


 
For a different thread, but we have all of those things outside the pale too.


----------



## Betsy Og (15 Nov 2006)

Homeowner - 

re the point about needing to be in Dublin for the creature comforts, I used to live in Dublin but now dont. That isnt to say I never return. The way I see it I get the good bits without the hassle.

i.e. if theres a social/sporting/entertainment event at the weekend (they are rarely enough on 'school nights') then I can go. OK I stay with friends or a hotel but I get to enjoy the city when it's less hassle. Same goes for shopping. The shops unique to Dublin wouldnt require to be frequented by me more than once or twice a year (as a fella I wouldnt really bother anyway - but I have seen that the ladies have a homing instinct for certain Dublin stores  )

Its not that I want to change your view but its just to give the perspective that a) its not all sackcloth & ashes (comforts wise) if you live in the country and b) the benefits of the capital arent all lost when you live outside of it.

Of course if you're going to go then go far enough away so you're not a commuter to Dublin which has to be the worst of both worlds.


----------



## edo (15 Nov 2006)

homeowner said:


> Great points Edo.  I just have one comment on the land issue:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Completely Fair Point Homeowner and Im in total agreement with you on that. 

Im in roughly the same boat myself.  

Have toyed with looking at moving down to the home patch in South Leinster , but as you said yourself, unless you are going live the "Good Life" on your own green acres , there is very very little as regards the amenities of urban life that in Dublin you take for granted. Normally when I start feeling wistfully nostalgic of the country life of my early years , I take a trip down to see the old folks for a week , enjoy the first couple of days , the fresh air the fishing , on the local golf course where I can take mulligans to my hearts content but by the end of the week, knowing that if I need anything from the shops I will have to have it purchased by 7pm at the latest, sitting the pub with about 4 other barflies and the most interesting topic of conversation is who did what with whom last weekend , and of course lack of employment on half decent money anywhere nearby normally has me flying back to the big smoke at warp speed at the end of the week.(Totally personal opinion by the way!)

Dublin will always attract a premium price as its the main urban centre and capital city - nothing will change that - even in this time of silly money there is a large difference between the Pale and outside it. Unless the government comes up with a real decentralisation strategy - it should be possible given the country isnt massive - from Jan07 Cork will be only 2 hrs from Dublin by train. Infrastructure is built here at a snails space and in a such a haphazard way it would make you wonder if the planners ever look at a map at all. And of course there is the issue of amenities - it would appear that planners never seem to consider when overseeing the worst urban sprawl this side of Denver that the citizenry might want something else outside their door rather than the road to Dublin - then again if you have to travel 2-3 hours a day in each direction to work and back - maybe all you need is a roof over your head - there wouldn't be much time left to anything else with your life - buts that a discussion for another day.


----------



## homeowner (15 Nov 2006)

ubiquitous said:


> For example Dublin port and its environs take up several hundred acres of land that is currently used for low return warehousing and storage yards. There is no reason why the port cannot be relocated and this and other unnecessary green space and brownfield sites utilised for residential housing.
> 
> The potential for higher density construction within the city centre alone is limitless. Walk a few hundred yards north of O'Connell Street for example and you will come across streets of single storey and two-storey housing. There is no reason why these (and similar areas) cannot be demolished, making way for large scale multistorey developments.



You are right there, but the fact is the government wont do what you have suggested.  So that leaves us with the land that is available.  Building up is  an option but to those of us who want a house with a garden for our kids then the choice is even more limited.  There are solutions to the problem but the government be wont implement them.  

People make the argument that families in france, spain etc... live in 3 bed apartments so why cant we, but i have seen those apartments and usually they are huge and rent is fixed for 10 years or more which is a totally different situation to a tiny 3 bed apartment in dublin city (actually most 3 bed apartments in dublin are penthouses and really expensive).


----------



## Superman (15 Nov 2006)

homeowner said:


> People make the argument that families in france, spain etc... live in 3 bed apartments so why cant we, but i have seen those apartments and usually they are huge


There is no reason that Planning Depts. in Ireland don't set larger minimum sizes for apartments - particularly in suburban areas.
Apartments are designed for investors rather than owner occupiers. Their small size perpetuates the belief that one cannot live longterm in an apartment.


----------



## homeowner (15 Nov 2006)

Betsy Og said:


> Its not that I want to change your view but its just to give the perspective that a) its not all sackcloth & ashes (comforts wise) if you live in the country and b) the benefits of the capital arent all lost when you live outside of it.



  sorry. i didnt mean to imply that life is terrible outside dublin.  I am just used to living here and it is very difficult as Edo said to go back to life without the convenience of what you have been used to.  Having said that, for me,  to live by the sea would go along way to winning me over, but that comes with very little choice of jobs.


----------



## Gordanus (16 Nov 2006)

Superman said:


> There is no reason that Planning Depts. in Ireland don't set larger minimum sizes for apartments - particularly in suburban areas.
> Apartments are designed for investors rather than owner occupiers. Their small size perpetuates the belief that one cannot live longterm in an apartment.



Hear hear!    And with rent control.............ah, sure we'd be in Paradise.   Will the govt actually do this?  Not on your nelly.   Have you not noticed the govt only ever takes direction from the UK or the USA? (Unless the EU makes them!)

(BTW was watching documentary on the Herald of Free Enterprise -  the UK Labour Paty was in opposition at the time and said it was a disgrace that Townsend Thoreson weren't prosecuted for corporate manslaughter and that they would bring in a law as soon as they were in power.........20+ years later, they still haven't.  Politicians' promises...)


----------



## auto320 (16 Nov 2006)

Vanilla said:


> For a different thread, but we have all of those things outside the pale too.


 
Most places have good facilities nowadays, with one major exception -- broadband.

I was looking at relocating to the west for part of each year, with the idea of coming back to the capital for the dark wet months, but any nice places I looked at couldn't be served by broadband (except satellite, which is one-way and no use to me, as well as being a bit pricey).

Was selling off Eircom, including the network, one of our worst decisions?


----------



## Betsy Og (17 Nov 2006)

Yorky said:


> A four bed detached in rural Ireland valued at €450,000? Absurd! Real value circa. €150,000.


 
Even if you had the site for nothing you'd struggle to build it for that. I'd say €250k min. (unless you're also of the view that materials and construction skills are grossly overinflated)


----------



## demoivre (17 Nov 2006)

I wonder will McWilliams be  revising his predictions for world oil prices now that they are down 30% from their July highs ( basis - light sweet crude futures for Dec. expiry)?


----------



## cjh (17 Nov 2006)

Betsy Og said:


> Even if you had the site for nothing you'd struggle to build it for that. I'd say €250k min. (unless you're also of the view that materials and construction skills are grossly overinflated)


 

I know people who've built four bed houses on their own sites for €150 K.


----------



## Betsy Og (17 Nov 2006)

cjh said:


> I know people who've built four bed houses on their own sites for €150 K.


 
The 250k was the value on the built object - what you'd sell it for at the very minimum (i.e. if, as the poster suggested, all the hypthesised market madness was taken out of the equation). 

I know its not impossible to build for €150k but you'd be definitely in a direct labour situation (and maybe doing bits yourself).


----------



## Guest127 (18 Nov 2006)

I built my little pad for around £10,000 including site £2,000 in the mid 70.'s. built an entension - maybe around the 1,000 sq ft mark- in 1989 for approx £30,000 complete. currently changing the bathroom ( cost around €9,000 complete) and kitchen. cost _complete_ for both is running somewhere around the €36,000 mark. I dont know what the cost of building now is but the kitting out bit sure is expensive. ( I am including new appliances, curtains, flooring, lighting, worktop and all labour in the above. as far as I can see everybody who crosses the door , plumbers, electricans etc just think up a number. if the building industry every comes to a stop this country is definitely in real trouble, but to be fair it doesn't look like coming to a stop. the bit I find the hardest to get into my head is that you go to a shop for say cookers or fridges etc and you do you best to get the best price ie if they quote xxxx for the cooker you try and knock off €100 etc . then the tradesmen come and go and all the haggling you did in the shop disappears down the tube.

_in short the kitchen/bathroom is now costing what a reasonably sized entension was 16 year ago._


----------



## Vanilla (20 Nov 2006)

Auto320- I'd imagine things have changed drastically in relation to broadband availability in the last few years- it's now unusual to find a place where you cannot avail of broadband.


----------



## RainyDay (20 Nov 2006)

Vanilla said:


> Auto320- I'd imagine things have changed drastically in relation to broadband availability in the last few years- it's now unusual to find a place where you cannot avail of broadband.



Yes - things have changed drastically - we've slipped way down on the European league tables where Ireland used to be in the top 5 on regular basis a few years ago. See [broken link removed] for more details.

I see McWilliams now truly believes that he is God, given that he opts to be chauffered round Dublin in the back seat of a car, wearing no seat belt. Obviously, he's too important for little things like seat belts. Just like Diana & Dodi were too important .....


----------



## ClubMan (20 Nov 2006)

RainyDay said:


> I see McWilliams now truly believes that he is God, given that he opts to be chauffered round Dublin in the back seat of a car, wearing no seat belt.


Is that the height of deific aspirations these days? Whatever happened to parting seas and turning water into gargle and stuff like that?


----------



## ninsaga (20 Nov 2006)

RainyDay said:


> ....I see McWilliams now truly believes that he is God, given that he opts to be chauffered round Dublin in the back seat of a car, wearing no seat belt. Obviously, he's too important for little things like seat belts.  .....



...well the seat belt was gonna get in the way.. you see he needed to be able to swing around to cup a feel of your one's 34d boob job after all!


----------



## liteweight (21 Nov 2006)

ClubMan said:


> Is that the height of deific aspirations these days? Whatever happened to parting seas and turning water into gargle and stuff like that?



Afraid so. All the mystery has gone since they decided the parting of the sea was probably the first recorded tsunami.  As to turning water into gargle, well, some think his blood is worth bottlin if that's any use?


----------



## RainyDay (21 Nov 2006)

ninsaga said:


> ...well the seat belt was gonna get in the way.. you see he needed to be able to swing around to cup a feel of your one's 34d boob job after all!



Actually, I was referring to the earlier car journey, where is was in the back of the car driven by the 'dacent skin' from Glasthule reminiscing about the good oul days. But the same issue applies to the limo drive as well.


----------



## liteweight (21 Nov 2006)

I guess the show is gone out of vogue....no one has any comments on last night's performance.


----------



## edo (21 Nov 2006)

liteweight said:


> I guess the show is gone out of vogue....no one has any comments on last night's performance.



I thought the last episode was a bit crap to be honest. Too much rehashing of the previous 2 shows with the all the bling etc etc . McWilliams has some good thought provoking ideas but the "all over the place" presentation really lets him down - last nights show was a perfect example - it petered out without any real message - the whole "venetian thing" was extremely badly explained - he could have dropped the whole over the top conspicious consumption bits (Like its a surprise to anybody who has been in a conscious state here for the last 7 years!) and spent more time fleshing out the German pensioners money and the venetian thingy in more detail.

I dunno - I suppose it resembles the book - that had no great conclusions either. Somebody needs to sit the chap down and explain to him how to write an proper essay - you need an introduction , the big middle bit where you make your points ,and a conclusion where you summarise and reach a conclusion on what you have written in the feckin first place. Reminds me of my first year in Uni doing History where I would go tearing into an essay , write like a mad thing for the first 3/4 of it and then totally lose the plot as the point I was trying to make in the first place - Luckily I had a great lecturer (an visting American professor If I remember rightly) who took me aside and grounded me in the basics - draft and redraft - edit and dont be afraid to wield the knife - even if the writing is nice and it sounded pretty cool - if didn't help your argument - get rid of it. 

 I definitely think McWillams could have benefited from that kind of advice on last nights showing - It just seemed that he had really overlaboured the first part and then suddenly realised he had just 10 minutes left to come up a with conclusion and where we go from here. 

Pity, He has some good stuff and his writing in the SBP and the Indo is first class - maybe he should stick to the short stuff or learn his lessons over this series and come back again a bit wiser and with his critical editors hat on.

My two cents 

Edo


----------



## Betsy Og (21 Nov 2006)

saw only 1 of the 3 shows - interesting in a fairly lightweight way and would watch the other 2 when the inevitable repeats come out, but the pure beauty of it was his capacity to appear totally self-congratulatory for pointing out what any eejit could tell you - well I suppose he did put a cute label on every "phonomenon" he could discern ..... groan  

David Brent ... watch your back


----------



## auto320 (21 Nov 2006)

Vanilla said:


> Auto320- I'd imagine things have changed drastically in relation to broadband availability in the last few years- it's now unusual to find a place where you cannot avail of broadband.


On the contrary, while you can get satelite (useless for uploading) at huge cost, once you move more than 2 miles from a broadband enabled exchange you haven't a hope of geting broadband. The story in rural Ireland, especially west, is grim and not looking to improve.

I had a serious look this year at relocating to North Roscommon/Sligo/Leitrim, looking for a nice country home in a parkland setting. Gave it up when I realised that I would be left behind in the information age stakes. Chances of ever running any kind of enterprise from this area would be nil.


----------



## Gordanus (24 Nov 2006)

What did everyone think of McWilliams strong hints that we should be looking at leaving the EU in the next 10 years and going it alone?   I cannot see how it would be possible for us to stand alone like that.


----------



## Howitzer (25 Nov 2006)

Gordanus said:


> What did everyone think of McWilliams strong hints that we should be looking at leaving the EU in the next 10 years and going it alone? I cannot see how it would be possible for us to stand alone like that.


 
At no point in the 3 episodes I saw did Macca say that. Are you referring to the final episode where he was making the point that we should position ourselves as a bridge for Chinese trade and enterprise? This was meant, and only makes sense, were we to remain as part of the EU.


----------



## Guest127 (25 Nov 2006)

I picked up what Gordanus picked up too. he cited venice as an independent city state that traded with all the big boys and could only do so as it was independent. he didnt actually say we should pull out of the eu.


----------



## TarfHead (25 Nov 2006)

He did speculate about the emergence of a politican advocating withdrawal from the EU. I don't recall him advocating it.


----------



## Gordanus (26 Nov 2006)

cuchulainn said:


> I picked up what Gordanus picked up too. he cited venice as an independent city state that traded with all the big boys and could only do so as it was independent. he didnt actually say we should pull out of the eu.



Yess, that's what I understood.  We can't be the equivalent of a city-state if we are in the EU.


----------



## bearishbull (26 Nov 2006)

I think he ellaborates in the business post today. www.sbpost.ie


----------



## almo (27 Nov 2006)

I think he means that (and if you read his article from SBP yesterday) while we're int he EU, it's also wise to remember that we have always benefitted from being a trading post (any archies will attest to this, we took in objects and styles, stuck a Made in Ireland tag on them, and shipped them off as objets d'artes).

I read the book, missed the show due to not being in Ireland, and found it interesting once you got into it.  It is interesting the takes on excess Ireland, which is almost a watered down version of what exists.

I caught 2 of EH 30 things and couldn't believed it wasn't under the RTE comedy tag, Mike Murphy would have been proud of some of it.  But EH lost a lot of kudos by trying to be too cute making money using his celebrity (flogging apartments in Cape Verde).


----------



## Johnny1 (25 Feb 2007)

David mcWilliams is an idiot going on about the so called Popes children he was in nappies when the Pope was in Ireland. Where did he get his facts?


----------



## Z100 (26 Feb 2007)

Johnny1 said:


> David mcWilliams is an idiot going on about the so called Popes children he was in nappies when the Pope was in Ireland. Where did he get his facts?


 
God love him if he was still in nappies when the Pope visited Ireland - he was 11 at the time.

Are you doubting his facts because you think he _was_ in nappies at the time? I once had to write an essay on Moses leading the Hebrew slaves out of Egypt, but I didn't actually witness it, in or out of nappies.


----------



## whizzbang (26 Feb 2007)

Johnny1 said:


> David mcWilliams is an idiot going on about the so called Popes children he was in nappies when the Pope was in Ireland. Where did he get his facts?



Thats it! Attack the person, not the argument!


----------



## Johnny1 (26 Feb 2007)

Bushfire said:


> God love him if he was still in nappies when the Pope visited Ireland - he was 11 at the time.
> 
> Are you doubting his facts because you think he _was_ in nappies at the time? I once had to write an essay on Moses leading the Hebrew slaves out of Egypt, but I didn't actually witness it, in or out of nappies.


He was 11 he still hardly knew the facts of life, so you are saying that he saw all these young lovers doing their stuff while visiting the Pope. If they are people buying his rubbish book's to read then fair play to him for making easy money.


----------



## Z100 (27 Feb 2007)

Johnny1 said:


> He was 11 he still hardly knew the facts of life, so you are saying that he saw all these young lovers doing their stuff while visiting the Pope.


 
Phew, for a minute I thought you were being serious! Good one!


----------

