As the government of Ireland undergoes scrutiny and criticism for its poorly mismanaged fiscal house, the media risks missing the primary lesson. Poor public sector incentives drive politicians to enact policies that defy the laws of economics. There is no such thing as a free lunch—not even a Keynesian lunch of government issued corn beef and newly minted cabbage. The political process centers around the delusion that government spending amounts to something other than a zero sum—and more often negative sum—game. Markets, private property, and economic liberty are the engines of growth. No government can achieve what a spontaneous order of freely trading people can produce.
The reality is clearly visible in Ireland’s own history. Unleashing markets via economic freedom enhancing policies led to remarkable growth rates of 5-9% in Ireland’s economy in the 1990s. During that period, working class Irish improved their lot dramatically. In 1986, Ireland’s GDP per capita was only 63% of the U.K.’s. By 1999 it exceeded per capita GDP in both the U.K. and Germany.
The rapid growth experienced by the Irish in the 1990s came with low taxes. As low taxes encouraged investment and growth, revenue came rolling into the coffers. The incentives facing politicians encouraged excessive public spending. Government continued to expand—growing out of proportion to the private market. Public sending took to new levels and the Leviathan was unconstrained despite the insufficient tax revenue to feed the insatiable appetite of the state. The public sector at best transfers—never creates—wealth and usually wastes resources and destroys new opportunities for innovation and growth. It doesn’t matter who you put in the political line-up. Bad incentives cause bad government policies.
While the media bashing of the current politicians responsible brings important attention to the issues, the bigger picture should not get lost in the debt reshuffling schemes. The bailouts will amount to the state only partially facing up to the realities that public spending cannot produce what the market accomplishes—no matter how hard we wish it so. The poor incentives facing politicians need to be addressed to check the proclivity to spend other people’s money less prudently than one spends her own. Eventually, the U.S. federal government (and some of the states like California) will have to face the same economic reality Ireland now confronts.
Fantastic point; I just have to write however to BEG that if you absolutely MUST be politically correct in your writings, PLEASE do not be grammatically incorrect in doing so. When the gender of a person has not been identified, or is unknown, the grammatically correct thing is for the gender is to be presumed to be male.
Like drawing one’s fingernails down a chalkboard; far and away the most poignant sentence in the entire blog was made less so by the hideous destruction of the English language in the attempt to portray the message in a more.
“The poor incentives facing politicians need to be addressed to check the proclivity to spend other people’s money less prudently than one spends her own.” [Emphasis mine]
If you wish to be politically correct, and still not cause an affront to the English language, you might in future say “his/her.” Granted, it’s a sign of political cowardice, but at least you can claim that it’s not incorrect.
Hey, don’t kill the messenger. I didn’t write the English Language rules. But look on the bright side, at least with the English language, we don’t have to worry about the gender of an inanimate object.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
The real question is how do we control these parasites?