Posts Tagged: economy


1
Nov 09

Recovery is not Reform

Published in today’s Sunday Independent.

Recovery is not reform. The government’s intended path to recovery is
a mixture of borrowing, pay cuts, and spending cuts. All recovery
plans treat the symptoms of a downturn. Global aggregate demand has
been buoyed by injections of capital by governments. There is evidence
the medicine is working.  Global recovery looks in sight. Reform
however, is a deeper, and more important, matter.

What kind of permanent changes to the international financial system
do we want to see to reduce the likelihood of prolonged downturns in
the future? Recovery and reform sometimes go hand in hand. At other
times reform hinders recovery.

Continue reading →


23
Oct 09

Prudence in the face of the unknown is key

Cross posted at the TASC-blog.

It is almost never correct to sacrifice a present benefit for a doubtful advantage in the future. Ireland’s political classes understand this truism at the genetic level. In a world where less and less seems predictable, Ireland faces multiple uncertainties: we cannot afford to splurge on one by neglecting the other.

The coming budget will unhinge whatever remains of social partnership, and may even bring down the government. The coming wave of mortgage defaults will ensure our banking system remains under extreme pressure and international scrutiny, no matter how well NAMA does or does not perform in cleaning up the balance sheets of recalcitrant banks. It is uncertain how many indigenous Irish businesses will weather the unprecedented economic storm they find themselves in, and what the resulting level of unemployment may be. The slow, but steady, international recovery may leave many parts of Irish society not directly tied to export industries behind. These are short-term concerns.

The negative social consequences of mass unemployment are starting to be felt. The cost to families and communities of increased domestic violence and criminality is incalculable. The security of every family against unnecessary hardship is an invisible social asset on which our culture is dependent: we don’t see this asset until it is gone. These are longer-term concerns.

In the midst of these uncertainties, the government must display prudence in the face of the unknown. Freeing up resources through increased efficiencies in the public sector will take time. One swipe of a pen can reduce incomes of public sector by thousands. A cut in public sector pay is inevitable. An increase in efficiency in the public sector—doing more with less—is not. Which course of action is more prudent, and which more likely to save taxpayers’ money in the long run?

In attempting to be prudent in some areas—fiscal policy, for one—the government may lose the good will of its citizens. By being extremely imprudent, in the cases of NAMA, the stalled reform of the taxation system, the crawl toward accountability, and most of all in a claw back of frontline public services, the government may damage the long run interests of its citizens.

The government has a duty to provide the highest standard of living for its citizens the nation can afford. That appears to be at 2003 levels of income at the moment. Our spending remains at 2009 levels. Prudence dictates the most likely course of action for the government in the coming budget. Actions are not without consequences, however, and a prudent public will do well to remember the choices made on their behalf come election time.


9
Oct 09

Economics of EU Integration Lecture 5

The map shows the results of a Eurobarometer p...
Image via Wikipedia

Assuming an EMU, what are the economic effects of one? We saw last week that the EU was almost certainly not and OCA, yet the EU exists as a functioning currency area. What are the likely effects of this on growth amongst member states? We developed the canonical model used to describe economic growth, and expose this model to the facts. We also looked at capital and factor market integration.

Here are the lecture notes, here is the handout. A recording of the lecture is below.

Continue reading →


20
Oct 08

Notes to Self: How to Moderate a Session at a Conference

I’ve been going to lots of conferences recently, and I’ve been asked to chair a few sessions here and there. Some have gone well, others have been disasters, but I think after doing a few and seeing a lot in a short space of time, I’ve come up with a nice list of things to do to try and keep things on track.

The idea is to moderate (or chair) a session to balance the speaker’s need to do their thing and say what they want to, with the audience and conference organiser(s) need to get on with the bloody conference and get out on time for food and coffee.

Once I went looking for a list like this, I couldn’t find anywhere. (This chap’s list is useless for academic presentations, though might be useful for other types of gigs I just don’t go to, hence the uselessness of his post.)

Not one thing here is my idea, I just saw some behaviours I thought worth writing down and noting to myself. If anyone has any more insights, leave them in the comments and I’ll update the post if there is sufficient interest. If anyone wants a Nobel Laureate’s ideas about conference ettiqutte, go here, it’s hillarious.

Here’s the list:

Communicate with the speakers. At the usual coffee break between sessions, speak to the people in the session, say hi, and get their presentations loaded. Make sure their presentations are uploaded on the computer in a folder they can recognise with their name on the presentation (because everyone is going to name their presentation for ABC conference ‘ABC presentation.ppt’). Click the file once, change it to ‘blogs.ppt’ in a folder you can recognise on the desktop, and you’re golden. Load each file and play all the way through with media bits and everything while the audience is chatting. There is nothing worse than watching someone’s funny bit fall flat on them. Don’t let speakers change computers halfway through the session unless they can do it really, really quickly and it is necessary beyond belief. Most of the time it’s not. This practice eats time and upsets the audience.

Get the timing right. Explain directly to each speaker how much time they have. If there are, say, two papers in a 1.5 hour session with discussants, you want each speaker to have 20 minutes for their presentation, 10 minutes for the discussant, and 15 minutes for general questions. When each speaker starts, note the time exactly on a piece of paper, then add 20 minutes. This will be important in seeming fair.

Give the speakers time warnings. Explain to the speakers you are going to give them TWO warnings on time, one at five minutes towards the end of the session, and one at one minute. This allows the speaker enough time to land their main points home before finishing up on or under the time. It also chills everybody in the audience out if the speaker happens to be awful, or if the speaker is brilliant and the audience really want to quiz them. Either way it keeps people on track. With the warnings, don’t be too obvious. Making eye contact and putting your hand up should do it. You don’t need a sign or anything.

Give the discussant their time. Whatever happens, you must allow the discussant their time to make whatever points they want. Usually discussants have read the papers and have thoughtful, useful, and constructive comments to make on the presenter’s paper. Budget 10 minutes, but if it takes 15, so be it, it is only eating into the audience’s question time, which you are going to monitor for time anyway. These comments are important for the speaker, and usually lead the audience’s discussion. If the discussant obviously hasn’t read the paper and is making stuff up, hew to this rule anyway. It’s just good form.

Take questions from the audience in ‘batch mode’. The audience members ask questions, the speaker writes them down, and responds to all of the questions one by one at the end. All (and I mean all) academics give general comments followed by questions, making each individual question last 1-2 minutes at least. If you allow one windy chap (or chapette) to monopolise the speaker’s time with a roundabout half lecture and the speaker’s reply followed up by a comment from Mr/Mrs Windy, this will upset those in the audience who wished to speak, and generally disrupt the flow of people’s happiness if audience members didn’t want to speak. Don’t let it happen. Budget for 3-5 questions in 15 minutes. After thanking the discussant, call for brief questions and note that the session has 15/14/12/etc minutes for questions. Participants put their hands up, amd you note down who wants to speak, and let them speak in the order you see them. This method is more time efficient and avoids overlapping of topics, as well as keeping everyone on a nice, respectful keel, and lets the speaker come up with more complete answers to boot.

Finish off early if you can. Thank everyone with applause, and hand the floor back to the main organiser of the conference for logistical details and more information on the day’s programme.