I think that a couple of economists in Ireland - generally later rather than sooner- rose up and tried to do their patriotic duty. They may not always have got it right (which of us does?), but they tried their best - at some personal expense - and generally did way above and beyond their bit and for this they deserve great credit:

David McWilliams (one of the first)
Alan Ahearne (one of the first)
Morgan Kelly
Gurdgiev
Lucey
.....

As for the rest...

They are experiencing a 'soft landing'.

For a government insider who lives on merrion st. I never heard Colm McCarthy talk any crap in the early-mid 2000s.

Fair enough, let's start at the top...
DMcW - the man who invented the guarantee...
AA - the man who was advisor to Brian Lenihan from before NAMA to after the bailout...
BL - one of the many who said that property prices were fine... (despite his other good stuff, getting it wrong in the boom was the problem, not getting it wrong in the bust; any fool can predict catastrophe when the wave crashed in to the tenth floor...).
CG - a man with a strong relationship with graphs and a loose relationship with the accuracy of the underlying data.

The first is a journalist and novelist with a background in economics. The third and fourth work in business dynamics more than economics, though they trade on their economics background for profit. Even the great MK, a man I have huge time for, is a medieval historical economist operating out of his brief, almost as a private citizen with an axe to grind.

Of them, only AA was an economist in the position to influence opinion where it matters. He opined right and chose wrong...

As far as I can see, the greatest problem with mainstream economists is two fold :

1) They rely too much on recent economic data i.e. the 'this time it's different' factor.
The figures from 1996-2006 looked as if nothing could stop Ireland's economic boom.
Had you looked at it from a much longer-term perspective, there were red flags all over the place.

2) Economics tries to mathematically quantify an issue which is driven by the most unquantifiable factor - human behavior.
Consequently, it is perpetually doomed to inaccuracy.

I would not be one to criticise DMcW so quickly.
He was the one to point out the Irish car was going far too fast.
When the drivers (Bertie, Cowen and Lenihan) spun out of control and smacked it into a tree, they turned to him and asked 'what now big shot ?'.
The guarantee was supposedly put in place to allow banks (and the greater financial industry) to reform and correct itself.
What happened was, they saw the bailout as a get-out-of-jail free card, pretended nothing had happened and tried to carry on regardless.

a bit unfair to McWilliams, yes he wanted the guarantee, not sure if he invented it

but he wanted the guarantee to be very very different

there are plenty of people to share the blame for our present position, McWilliams is not one of them

From the article:

What it should really say:

The financial system is based on fraud - and has become more so over time. In the early years of this century, people went out of their way to not get caught, now no one does. The system became, in consequence, a huge fraud machine. When the shit hit the fan, the toadying politicians threw the taxpayer under the bus. The bought and paid-for traditional media then propagated fear globally.

McWilliams wanted a Swedish style guarantee as part of a long term solution but Lenenhan wanted the political short term benefits, after the politicians number one priority is reelection. An economists suggestion interpreted and implemented by a politician.

McWilliams got the guarantee he wanted.

He didn't get the follow-up action to resolve the banks, liquidate the bad, form new ones, sack the boards and management etc.

He got the guarantee he wanted...

If we are asking what economists actually did, i think McWilliams saved many a person from buying into the bubble and an alternative opinion to the group think sweeping the nation. May not agree with on other matters but its an important contribution. Similarly with Morgan Kelly

Fair enough with McWilliams and I agree that his warnings were timely (not stopped clock). Just because he was right in 2000, doesn't mean he wasn't still right in 2006...

A few names missing from that list of decent efforts : Karl Whelan, Seamus Coffey and Steve Kinsella come to mind.

That's a bit harsh on Morgan Kelly. He is much more than that. Very clever economist, so what if he enjoys historical research too? Saved a lot of people a lot of pain.

While, I'm at it, Richard Curran (he of "Future Shock: Property Crash" on RTE fame) was also very helpful to a lot of people.

Not everyone is as clued-in as a pinster in relation to property prices and trends. Both Curran and Kelly told the inconvenient and unwelcome truth at the right time.

Agreed - my point about MK was that it wasn't his 'job' to be telling us this. The economists in the DoF, the CB, the social partners, the banks even, those are the ones who are identified as failures by Mr. Haldane - i.e. those that pontificate on things before they happen. MK is an almost accidental truth-sayer. It was through irritation at the nonsense he was hearing that he started to write to papers... there's a lot to be said for irritability; sadly in Ireland, not rocking the boat is what is valued.