• Increased labor supply - via a late baby boom, modest immigration into Ireland during the 1990's, and rising labor force participation rates, particularly for women

• Foreign Investment and EU Single Market - key to Ireland's ability to attract foreign direct investment

• Deregulation and Competition Policy - introduction of competition policy was a major stimulant in the services sector; trade liberalization, such that In 1999 the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) rated Ireland in the top three countries in terms of economic openness.

• Budget Policy - especially low corporate tax, fiscal consolidation and other fundamental economic reforms;

• The Social Partnership - largely based in the social consensus model of the Nordic countries and Austria; trade unions made a commitment to wage moderation in return for a government's commitment to the welfare state.

• Education investments - Ireland invested important financial and human resources in education since the 1960s with the introduction of free secondary education and grants for third level education. By the 1990s the Irish workforce was amongst the best educated in Europe. And they all could communicate efficiently in English. Not only had Ireland a supply of well qualified entrants to the labor market, many of those who emigrated in the 1980s were to return back to Ireland during the boom.

• EU Structural and Cohesion Funds - The EU Structural Funds have been vital to Ireland's development through investment in transport infrastructures, education, training and industry.

Also, some of what Friedman says is just flatly wrong. This pretty much sums up his argument:

There is so much wrong with this that it is hard to know even where to begin.

First, there is no monolithic "Anglo-Irish" economic model. Important aspects of Irish economic success (social partnership, regional development funds) have roots in the Scandinavian and Continental models, as Brad DeLong has suggested.

Friedman, in his earlier piece, actually does pay Scandinavia a backhanded complement:

I wonder when Friedman is going to write columns explicating the success of the Nordic countries? I'm not holding my breath.

Second, there are other ways in which Ireland's economy does not differ as much from France or Germany as Friedman's analysis would have you believe.

Take fiscal policy, for instance. Friedman (and many conservatives and business types) seem to believe that Ireland is an American-style low-tax, low government spending type of economy. While it is true that Ireland does have the lowest corporate tax rates in Europe, the Irish government in 2003 spent 44% of national income, compared to 49% for Germany, 54% for France (and 35% for the US). The Irish have a national health service and "basically free" college education, too.

Can it really be that extra 5% of national income devoted to public spending that is killing the German economy? Seems unlikely.

There is also the issue of working hours. Friedman suggests that the Irish work harder than the lazy Germans or Frenchmen, committed to their 35-hour work weeks come hell or high water. Friedman would thus probably be surprised to find out the following:

Annual hours worked per person in Ireland have actually fallen by about 15% since 1990 (from 1,925 to 1,675). So the Irish now work fewer hours than do American workers (1,820 hours per year), but still more than do the French (1,550 hour per year) or Germans (1,450). It's pretty clear in which direction the trend is going, however. How soon before Friedman starts writing columns berating those lazy Irish? Probably as soon as the next economic downturn.

Then there's the issue of human capital investment. Friedman writes as if Ireland invented the idea, but the following charts show that France and Germany stack up pretty well, too:

Education Spending

Ireland (5.7% of national income) spends more than Germany (5.3%), but less than France (6.1%).

Participation in Secondary Education

France and Germany lead the way here.

University Education Attainment

Ireland (32% of students with university degree) again trails France (35%), but leads Germany (22%). Remember, though, that fewer German students attend university because of the apprenticeship programs that provide industrial workers with skills training:

The point here is obviously not to belittle the real economic progress that Ireland has made in the last two decades. But the idea that Ireland has discovered some new "economic model" that is completely at odds with what France and Germany are already doing is ludicrous.