The Dublin Institute for Culture and Knowledge (DICK for short) continues to grow. We are currently recruiting for prospective Members, and, as our trusty Atlas Foundation start-up kit states:

"In interviewing potential employees, it's important to not only ask the usual and thoroughly expected questions (such as, "Why do you think you're a good fit for this job?"), but also to ask the questions that may come as a surprise. Meaningful questions a candidate may not have planned for can often give you a glimpse of the person's real character and capabilities, as well as insights into how they may handle impromptu situations. Get the person to think introspectively. If you find a person who just cannot be introspective (self-analytical and self-critical), than you have probably found someone so full of himself that he or she is not teachable"

Of course, there is also the vital "sex appeal" factor:

""Excite" status is a very subjective and it's based on gut feel. "Exciting candidates" raise comments such as: "This candidate is going to teach us a thing or two." "Wow, it will be very cool to have this person representing the Mackinac Center." "He's very impressive." "Other people on the staff will have no trouble looking up to, and liking, this guy.""

Bearing all that in mind, we have decided to admit we haven't a clue be original and ask potential recruits to suggest your own Portfolios and why you feel your résumé ideally suits you for this role.

(Or else include an interesting/funny/sexy personal photo. We're not fussy, and TV always loves good-looking spokespersons. And we are still guaranteed at least some amusement.)

Emails to freestater 1916 at hotmail dot com, please.

Also, P.O'Neill at Best of Both Worlds has expressed concerns about the finances of our organisation. I am pleased to reassure readers that someone at the Atlas Foundation has already endorsed the time-honoured Irish solution to this problem:

"Focus on New Ways to Leverage New Opportunities

In the US, we are living in an unprecedented time - there are currently more new dollars available at a faster rate than ever before, due to intergenerational transfers.

"This nation will witness an unprecedented transfer of wealth-to heirs, government, and charity-over the next 50 years," writes Boston College professor Paul Schervish in a Boston Globe op-ed. According to an economic model he and a colleague developed, at least $40.6 trillion will change hands from 1998 to 2052-and that's a very conservative estimate. If one instead assumes that the rate of saving will remain at the usual historical level and that the average real growth of the economy will equal the 3 percent annual average of the past two decades, then the actual transfer of wealth will total $73 trillion. And even that figure refers only to estates at death, ignoring the large gifts to family and charities that occur during Americans' lifetimes. Combining lifetime philanthropic giving and charitable bequests, Schervish estimates $10 trillion to $25 trillion of personal wealth will go into charities during the 50-year period. After interviews with over 200 high net worth individuals, Schervish concludes, "wealth-holders are eager to use their money wisely"; the new philanthropists seek "a new relationship between donors and charities." They "approach their philanthropy in the same entrepreneurial spirit with which they made their fortunes." (Philanthropy, May/June 2002, p. 5)

Our job is to channel as much of it as possible to our work. Find potential donors who share your values."

So there you have it - the Elderly Relative Strategy. Now if you'll excuse me, I've an important appointment in Kinsealy.

(And did we mention that we have just adopted - as a central policy plank - our opposition to an activist judiciary hounding retired Taoisigh?)