I find his ‘analysis’ in general to be a great steaming pile of dung, but maybe that’s just me.

You asked for stats. I gave you stats.

And your rebuttal? That’s just poo-poo!

My three year old daughter could construct a more coherent argument.

You seem to hold it against the public sector that there hasn’t been huge job losses, although at least you now accept that there has been some.

If you read back through the thread you’ll see that I never denied that some public servants have lost jobs, I just put the numbers in perspective.

Nor have I sought to blame the remaining 99% of the public sector still in employment. Rather I’ve calmly explained why the private sector will always have a fundamentally different level of security (short of us adopting a command-economic model).

FDR in the New Deal used the public sector and public expenditure to create jobs for people because in a recession it is unrealistic to expect the private sector to do so in any significant way.

FDR did indeed.

Unfortunately for us seeking to emulate his example, he had a couple of levers available to him that are firmly outside our reach. He could fire up those printing-presses in the Fed and keep them whirring for years on end. Also he could, and did, initiate a rearmament program as a precursor to America’s involvement in WWII.

Of course, we no longer issue our own currency. Nor, I hope, is their a global conflict around the corner.

I don’t know where McCarthy’s getting his figures from. (I find his ‘analysis’ in general to be a great steaming pile of dung, but maybe that’s just me.)

In the private sector, the job losses are well documented and would translate into an attrition rate of over 10%.

Joanna’s figures do not, as she indeed says, take account of other parts of the PS (and those early ‘retirements’ on much less pay are clearly to be included in this payroll reduction). I suspect that those figures are due some serious revision before the end of the year – my own substantial part of the PS will have easily reached 10% by then.

Please enlighten me with some of those bountiful examples of Irish private sector firms with the power to compel their customers to pay more for less

You’ve clearly not dealt with the tech sector.

You seem to hold it against the public sector that there hasn’t been huge job losses, although at least you now accept that there has been some. In fact my figures are an underestimate as they only include the figures for the civil service, HSE and local authorities.

The Government should preserve jobs wherever it can because if it does not there will be more dole to be paid out of taxpayers money. FDR in the New Deal used the public sector and public expenditure to create jobs for people because in a recession it is unrealistic to expect the private sector to do so in any significant way. At at time of significant job losses in the private sector the objective should be to preserve jobs in the public sector. Instead jobs are being cut and there is an embargo on replacing posts that become vacant thereby reducing the opportunities out there for job seekers.

If you’re interest in more detailed stats, see Table 2 in this paper presented yesterday to the SSISI by Colm McCarthy.

He calculates the percentage losses from peak as follows:

• public (broadly defined): 0.0%
• private: -12.9%
• construction: -42.1%

Statistics, please?

Even using Joanna’s inflated numbers above that include retirements, the public sector attrition rate would be about 1.7%. Using the accepted concept of job loses (including temporary contracts not renewed, but excluding retirements), the rate would be closer to 1%.

In the private sector, the job losses are well documented and would translate into an attrition rate of over 10%.

Now which one of those rates is much lower than the other?

Clearly, you’ve had all the real-world experience of either a secondary school student or an economist.

Is my DNS server broken? Have I been redirected to p.ie in error?

no firm in the private sector [has] the power to compel their customer-base to pay more for a lesser service.

The world abounds with counter-examples to this startling suggestion that the Free Market Fairy really does exist…

Please enlighten me with some of those bountiful examples of Irish private sector firms with the power to compel their customers to pay more for less, in the same way the state can compel its citizens to pay more tax while reducing service levels.

Statistics, please? I know that the unions are claiming that e300 million has been lost from the PS payroll this year (and indeed many of my own hard-working younger colleagues, still on temporary contracts, are now gone and are missed).

[...] no firm in the private sector [has] the power to compel their customer-base to pay more for a lesser service.

Clearly, you’ve had all the real-world experience of either a secondary school student or an economist. The world abounds with counter-examples to this startling suggestion that the Free Market Fairy really does exist…