Question: How much money did Ireland receive through the Marshall plan?
About the article "Marshall Plan", section "Loans and Grants".

Candidate passages:
The Marshall Plan was originally scheduled to end in 1953.
Any effort to extend it was halted by the growing cost of the Korean War and rearmament.
American Republicans hostile to the plan had also gained seats in the 1950 Congressional elections, and conservative opposition to the plan was revived.
Thus the plan ended in 1951, though various other forms of American aid to Europe continued afterwards.
The years 1948 to 1952 saw the fastest period of growth in European history.
Industrial production increased by 35%.
Agricultural production substantially surpassed pre-war levels.
The poverty and starvation of the immediate postwar years disappeared, and Western Europe embarked upon an unprecedented two decades of growth that saw standards of living increase dramatically.
There is some debate among historians over how much this should be credited to the Marshall Plan.
Most reject the idea that it alone miraculously revived Europe, as evidence shows that a general recovery was already underway.
Most believe that the Marshall Plan sped this recovery, but did not initiate it.
The United States worked to direct the Marshall Plan towards children and an increase of nutritional material for all citizens within western Europe so as to shed a positive light on its goals as it worked to effectively defeat communist threats.
One effect of the plan was that it subtly "Americanized" countries, especially Austria, who embraced United States' assistance, through popular culture, such as Hollywood movies and rock n' roll (Bischof, Pelinka and Stiefel 174-175).
The political effects of the Marshall Plan may have been just as important as the economic ones.
Marshall Plan aid allowed the nations of Western Europe to relax austerity measures and rationing, reducing discontent and bringing political stability.
The communist influence on Western Europe was greatly reduced, and throughout the region communist parties faded in popularity in the years after the Marshall Plan.
The trade relations fostered by the Marshall Plan helped forge the North Atlantic alliance that would persist throughout the Cold War.
At the same time, the nonparticipation of the states of Eastern Europe was one of the first clear signs that the continent was now divided.
The Marshall Plan also played an important role in European integration.
Both the Americans and many of the European leaders felt that European integration was necessary to secure the peace and prosperity of Europe, and thus used Marshall Plan guidelines to foster integration.
In some ways this effort failed, as the OEEC never grew to be more than an agent of economic cooperation.
Rather it was the separate European Coal and Steel Community, which notably excluded Britain, that would eventually grow into the European Union.
However, the OEEC served as both a testing and training ground for the structures that would later be used by the European Economic Community.
The Marshall Plan, linked into the Bretton Woods system, also mandated free trade throughout the region.
While some historians today feel some of the praise for the Marshall Plan is exaggerated, it is still viewed favorably and many thus feel that a similar project would help other areas of the world.
After the fall of communism several proposed a "Marshall Plan for Eastern Europe" that would help revive that region.
Others have proposed a Marshall Plan for Africa to help that continent, and U.S. vice president Al Gore suggested a Global Marshall Plan.
"Marshall Plan" has become a metaphor for any very large scale government program that is designed to solve a specific social problem.
It is usually used when calling for federal spending to correct a perceived failure of the private sector. 
Turning the plan into reality required negotiations among the participating nations, and to get the plan through the United States Congress.
Sixteen nations met in Paris to determine what form the American aid would take, and how it would be divided.
The negotiations were long and complex, with each nation having its own interests.
France's major concern was that Germany not be rebuilt to its previous threatening power.
The Benelux countries, (Belgium, Netherlands and Luxemburg), despite also suffering under the Nazis, had long been closely linked to the German economy and felt their prosperity depended on its revival.
The Scandinavian nations, especially Sweden, insisted that their long-standing trading relationships with the Eastern bloc nations not be disrupted and that their neutrality not be infringed.
The United Kingdom insisted on special status as a longstanding belligerent during the war, concerned that if it were treated equally with the devastated continental powers it would receive virtually no aid.
The Americans were pushing the importance of free trade and European unity to form a bulwark against communism.
The Truman administration, represented by William L. Clayton, promised the Europeans that they would be free to structure the plan themselves, but the administration also reminded the Europeans that implementation depended on the plan's passage through Congress.
A majority of Congress members were committed to free trade and European integration, and were hesitant to spend too much of the money on Germany.
However, before the Marshall Plan was in effect, France, Austria, and Italy needed immediate aid.
On December 17, 1947, the United States agreed to give $40 million to France, Austria, China, and Italy.
Agreement was eventually reached and the Europeans sent a reconstruction plan to Washington.
In the document the Europeans asked for $22 billion in aid.
Truman cut this to $17 billion in the bill he put to Congress.
The plan encountered sharp opposition in Congress, mostly from the portion of the Republican Party led by Robert A. Taft that advocated a more isolationist policy and was weary of massive government spending.
The plan also had opponents on the left, Henry A. Wallace notably among them.
Wallace saw the plan as a subsidy for American exporters and sure to polarize the world between East and West.
Wallace, the former vice president and secretary of agriculture, mockingly called this the "Martial Plan," arguing that it was just another step towards war.
However, opposition against the Marshall Plan was greatly reduced by the shock of the Communist coup in Czechoslovakia in February 1948.
Soon after, a bill granting an initial $5 billion passed Congress with strong bipartisan support.
Congress would eventually allocate $12.4 billion in aid over the four years of the plan.
On March 17, 1948, President Harry S. Truman addressed European security and condemned the Soviet Union before a hastily convened Joint Session of Congress.
Attempting to contain spreading Soviet influence in Eastern Europe, Truman asked Congress to restore a peacetime military draft and to swiftly pass the Economic Cooperation Act, the name given to the Marshall Plan.
Of the Soviet Union Truman said, "The situation in the world today is not primarily the result of the natural difficulties which follow a great war.
"It is chiefly due to the fact that one nation has not only refused to cooperate in the establishment of a just and honorable peace but—even worse—has actively sought to prevent it.
"Members of the Republican-controlled 80th Congress (1947–1949) were skeptical.
"In effect, he told the Nation that we have lost the peace, that our whole war effort was in vain," noted Representative Frederick Smith of Ohio.
Others thought he had not been forceful enough to contain the USSR.
"What said fell short of being tough," noted Representative Eugene Cox, a Democrat from Georgia.
"There is no prospect of ever winning Russian cooperation."
Despite its reservations, the 80th Congress implemented Truman's requests, further escalating the Cold War with the USSR.
Truman signed the Economic Cooperation Act into law on April 3, 1948; the Act established the Economic Cooperation Administration (ECA) to administer the program.
ECA was headed by economic cooperation administrator Paul G. Hoffman.
In the same year, the participating countries (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, West Germany, the United Kingdom, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, and the United States) signed an accord establishing a master financial-aid-coordinating agency, the Organization for European Economic Cooperation (later called the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development or OECD), which was headed by Frenchman Robert Marjolin. 
Neoliberal criticism.
Initial criticism of the Marshall Plan came from a number of economists.
Wilhelm Röpke, who influenced German Minister for Economy Ludwig Erhard in his economic recovery program, believed recovery would be found in eliminating central planning and restoring a market economy in Europe, especially in those countries which had adopted more fascist and corporatist economic policies.
Röpke criticized the Marshall plan for forestalling the transition to the free market by subsidizing the current, failing systems.
Erhard put Röpke's theory into practice and would later credit Röpke's influence for West Germany's preeminent success.
Henry Hazlitt criticized the Marshall Plan in his 1947 book "Will Dollars Save the World?
", arguing that economic recovery comes through savings, capital accumulation and private enterprise, and not through large cash subsidies.
Neoliberal icon Ludwig von Mises of course criticized the Marshall Plan in 1951, believing that "the American subsidies make it possible for [Europe's] governments to conceal partially the disastrous effects of the various socialist measures they have adopted".
Some critics and Congressmen at the time believed that America was giving too much aid to Europe.
America had already given Europe $9 billion in other forms of help in previous years.
The Marshall Plan gave another $13 billion, equivalent to about $100 billion in 2010 value.
Critics did not think that it was necessary for Americans to be using so much money to help nations they had already assisted in many ways before. 
Austria finalized its Marshall Plan program in the end of 1947 and received the first tranche of Marshall Plan aid in March 1948.
Heavy industry (or what was left of it) was concentrated around Linz, in the American zone, and in British-occupied Styria.
Their products were in high demand in post-war Europe.
Naturally, the administrators of the Marshall Plan channeled available financial aid into heavy industry controlled by the American and British forces.
American military and political leaders made no secret of their intentions: Geoffrey Keyes said that "we cannot afford to let this key area (Austria) fall under exclusive influence of the Soviet Union."
The Marshall Plan was deployed primarily "against" the Soviet zone but it was not completely excluded: it received 8% of Marshall plan investments (compared to 25% of food and other physical commodities).
The Austrian government regarded financial aid to the Soviet zone as a lifeline holding the country together.
This was the only case when Marshall Plan funds were distributed in Soviet-occupied territories.
The Marshall Plan was not universally popular, especially in its initial phase.
It benefited some trades such as metallurgy but depressed others such as agriculture.
Heavy industries quickly recovered, from 74.7% of pre-war output in 1948 to 150.7% in 1951.
American planners deliberately neglected consumer goods industries, construction trades and small business.
Their workers, almost half of the industrial workforce, suffered from rising unemployment.
In 1948–1949, a substantial share of Marshall Plan funds was used to subsidize imports of food.
American money effectively raised real wages: the grain price was about one-third of the world price, while agriculture remained in ruins.
Marshall Plan aid gradually removed many of the causes of popular unrest that shook the country in 1947, but Austria remained dependent on food imports.
The second stage of the Marshall Plan, which began in 1950, concentrated on productivity of the economy.
According to Michael J. Hogan, "in the most profound sense, it involved the transfer of attitudes, habits and values as well, indeed a whole way of life that Marshall planners associated with progress in the marketplace of politics and social relationships as much as they did with industry and agriculture."
The program, as instructed by American lawmakers, targeted improvement in factory-level productivity, labor-management relations, free trade unions and introduction of modern business practices.
The Economic Cooperation Administration, which operated until December 1951, distributed around $300 million in technical assistance and attempted steering the Austrian social partnership (political parties, labor unions, business associations and executive government) in favor of productivity and growth instead of redistribution and consumption.
Their efforts were thwarted by the Austrian practice of making decisions behind closed doors.
The Americans struggled to change it in favor of open, public discussion.
They took a strong anti-cartel stance, appreciated by the Socialists, and pressed the government to remove anti-competition legislation.
But ultimately they were responsible for the creation of the vast monopolistic public sector of the economy (and thus politically benefiting the Socialists).
According to Bischof, "no European nation benefited more from Marshall Plan than Austria."
Austria received nearly a $1 billion through Marshall Plan, and half a billion in humanitarian aid.
The Americans also refunded all occupation costs charged in 1945–1946, around $300 million.
In 1948–1949 Marshall Plan aid contributed 14% of national income, the highest ratio of all involved countries.
Per capita, aid amounted to $132 compared to $19 for the Germans.
But Austria also paid more war reparations per capita than any other Axis state or territory.
Total war reparations taken by the Soviet Union including withdrawn USIA profits, looted property and the final settlement agreed in 1955, are estimated between $1.54 billion and $2.65 billion (Eisterer: 2 to 2.5 billion). 
In the "Digest", Paulus wrote a passage on money.
Much as Aristotle did, Paulus described the nature of money, including how it arises from the inconvenience of barter.