Talk:Leprechaun economics

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Proposed deletion of article

• How does a tweet by Paul Krugman deserve an entire article? How is it encyclopaedic? The article doesn't even focus on the point of the tweet but covers a whole slew of related subjects. At best this deserves a mention in Economy of the Republic of Ireland article (which covers the unusual features of Irish GDP calculation). I'm calling for deletion here. Jimg (talk)

• Keep Leprechaun economics is the largest yearly normalised GDP growth rate of any OECD economy in modern times, which was finally proven three years later to be largely artificial growth; it was labeled by a noble prize-winning economist who has gone on to use the term many times himself in other guises, and has been used by the Irish media in other guises (per the article); it led to a three-year search on the origin of the growth that was only proved in 2018 as being Apple, concluding that it is the largest BEPS action in history (per the article); it led to Ireland paying over 380m in additional EU levies (per the article); it led to the Irish central bank replacing GDP/GNI with GNI* (the first time any OECD economy has had to state that its metrics are unsound); it led to further EU investigations into Apple in Ireland; and has led economists to now question the accuracy of aggregate EU economic data. Creating a long section in the Economy of Ireland wikipedia article on these connected events would not be helpful. If the financial reports are correct, we are going to see LE II and LE III in the next 18 months, so this article might get even longer (or, else maybe Krugman will add a new separate label that could justify a new article).Britishfinance (talk) 09:53, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

• The distortions in Irish GDP calculations can/should, of course, be covered in wikipedia. The entire subject of GDP calculation - which is controversal - can/should be convered - in the article about GDP. All the subsequent events/actions/etc. that you list are products of this GDP calculculation/miscalculation and not the result of Krugman using/inventing a colourful phrase in a tweet. The phrase is also somewhat derogatory (and was intended to be so by Krugman) and so will always be contentious. I recognise that you've put a lot of work into this but you've also made it very difficult to NOT suspect that you have an agenda given the pattern of "salami slicing" edits, the duplication of references, images, quotes and claims across many articles. I don't want to get into a flame war but I do believe that you've made it difficult for someone who has an interest in this area to get any useful knowledge from wikipedia. My suggestion is - since this article is mostly about transfer pricing - to remove the duplicated text (which you've already covered in other wikipedia articles) and roll the remainder into the Irish economy article.Jimg (talk) 15:15, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

• Keep. This article should not be deleted or rolled into something else. A scan for the term gives over a hundred references, and the event has had large consequences for Ireland.31.187.2.74 (talk) 15:16, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

• Keep it. I have learnt a lot about how world really works from here. Zezen (talk) 12:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

• Keep I am doing a paper on this subject - there are already published papers on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.187.0.241 (talk) 12:10, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

FYI: Paul Krugman referenced this Wikipedia article in a 31 March 2019 tweet from @paulkrugman

Hi. Paul Krugman himself just referenced this Wikipedia article in a tweet titled "By the way, if you are trying comparisons of, say, GDP rather than employment, be aware that Irish numbers can be hugely distorted by "leprechaun economics" -- spurious shifts in corporate reporting driven by tax avoidance 3/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leprechaun_economics …"; on 31 March 2019 at 7:58