It's not hard to guess who said this last week: "I hope oil does stay at $125 or $130 a barrel". It was, of course, Ryanair's Michael O'Leary. He wants oil prices to stay high through the year and into next winter. "I think", says Mr O'Leary optimistically, "that will bankrupt half of the airlines flying today".

He's a gas man, Michael is. It's not just soaring oil prices for which Mr O'Leary hungers. Here's Mr O'Leary in BusinessWeek, last February: "We'd welcome a good, deep, and bloody recession because it will lead to significantly lower airfares and that will be good for Ryanair's business model", he said. "We'll emerge stronger and with fewer competitors."

From Mr O'Leary's point of view, there's no end to the fabulous things that a good, deep and bloody recession will bring him. Not only will it destroy rival airlines, it will "help see off the environmental nonsense".

And if the recession is really bad it will lower airport charges because it will "expose the regulatory scam".

Most people worry about petrol prices and food prices and whether they'll keep their jobs through this recession. They worry about how cuts in health and education budgets will affect their families. Or whether granny can afford the heating to keep her alive through next winter. Mr O'Leary, with admirable frankness, lets us know that the measure of everything is how it benefits Ryanair.

I've no idea if Mr O'Leary is as obnoxious and greedy as he appears, and it doesn't matter. He's not the problem, he's merely a garish symptom of the problem.

Last week, another millionaire very publicly acted in his own interests. Developer Bernard McNamara walked away from a deal to construct five large social housing projects, ensuring that inner city areas long in need of regeneration will remain stagnant, with all the social consequences that follow.

Some time ago, Mr McNamara agreed a "public private partnership" deal. These days, the construction business being what it is, he decided it's in his interest to walk away -- and that it's within his rights to do so. And if Dublin Council thinks otherwise, it's unlikely to bring the matter to court, as Mr McNamara has exceedingly deep pockets.

And last week, when a group of rich people issued a statement effectively telling the Supreme Court to bugger off, they too were within their rights.

It's 10 months since the Supreme Court found that DCC boss Jim Flavin acted as an inside trader, and that to do so was to perpetrate "a fraud".

The DCC board last week effectively issued a judgement setting the Supreme Court straight on the law. Bugger off, ye bewigged ones, and leave our Jim alone. Jim's a very good money-maker (the inside trading netted DCC some €86 million in profit).

At last count we had 33,000 millionaires (not including the value of their homes). And the top 100 of them average about 100 million each. It means there exists -- on a scale we've not had to deal with before -- a very large social bloc with enormous economic and political clout. And this bloc is hardwired to act only in its own interests, whatever the consequences for others.

We're not talking about character flaws (let's leave Michael O'Leary out of this). In the same circumstances, you or I might act as self-interestedly as any of these people. In cases where they have shareholders, they would argue that they have not just a right to act without social concern but a duty to do so (Aer Lingus comes to mind).

Democratic theory suggests we need a counterbalance to this power bloc. Not here.

Wealthy power blocs have always held sway. In the 1980s and 1990s, the State knew about the huge tax-evasion schemes that drained the exchequer -- but didn't dare do anything. They closed hospital wards instead.

Crooked developer Patrick Gallagher was jailed in the North -- down here we couldn't touch him for the same crimes. The law is not applied equally -- the statue of justice has had the blindfold removed, and she's winking at the lads in the private helicopters.

There's a private parallel banking system for the golden circles. David McWilliams has written of how, last summer, senior banking figures were quietly telling their wealthy clients to get out of property. At the same time, the same banks were telling the rest of us it was a time to buy.

In all things, we can be certain that the elite will get something close to the truth, and we'll get the cover story.

The existence of such a powerful bloc would be a concern at any time -- but these days we have a government and a ruling ethos that makes it dangerous.

The official ethos, encouraged in word and deed by the political establishment -- and not just by Fianna Fail -- says that the public service must be relentlessly beaten back, and its functions delegated to the private sector.

The mantra used for this is "give the taxpayer value for money" -- although it does no such thing. When Brian Cowen speaks of the health service, he makes it clear it's about "value for money". This has led to a business model being applied to the health service, resulting in a huge flow of profit to the private sector, in place of a public infrastructure that could serve us through generations.

It's also where the "public private partnership" notion comes from. The PPP is a "risk-sharing" contrivance created in Britain, where it's now seen as a notoriously inefficient model. Too often, the state took the risk, the private contractor took the profit, the customer -- and taxpayer -- got the short end. Why should a millionaire builder have any say in whether a socially necessary project goes ahead? Because the Government farms out its responsibilities to private interests.

And they, as you might expect, take up those responsibilities when and if it suits their financial wellbeing.

In theory, the government rules as an even-handed referee, mediating fairly between the different interest groups. In practice, we know that's not true.

Brian Cowen was happy with the notorious "Galway tent" for 15 years.

Now, it's become an embarrassment, so it's cancelled.

Too many of the party's sugar daddies arrived there straight from a guest appearance at one tribunal or another.

Too many of the new wealthy have a distaste for that old-fashioned style of backslapping. They prefer a quiet word in the ear of a minister.

The traditional democratic response to the existence of powerful blocs is to construct checks and balances. This great little nation, however, has extremely weak public interest laws.

Regulations are introduced, as a gesture to the "social partners", but they're not enforced, because the regulatory mechanism isn't given the resources. After all, we don't want more timewasters clogging up the public service, do we?

In grown-up countries, there are checks and balances. When an unaccountable, powerful bloc emerges, and the state kowtows to it, we are in trouble.

Happily, Michael O'Leary can't arrange to deepen the recession.

But he can still throw his weight around. Last year, Ryanair imposed a charge on luggage. Asked why this should be, a Ryanair executive answered truthfully, "Because we say so".

Mr O'Leary was once asked, "How do you keep your employees motivated and happy?" He laughed and said, "Fear".

Only kidding, of course. He went on to explain about his flat hierarchy and his high rates of pay. He's a gas man, Michael is.