Massive investment in India by IBM

[Fungus]

The only hypocricy on this thread is coming from those people who covet the utopia of a totally market economy without state intervention, who then complain when IBM take their business to India when they are entirely free to do so.

And please don't put words in my mouth. I'm not encouraging it. I'm simply accepting the realities of the situation.

Hypocrisy. You accept this reality, but deplore the reality of taming the unions, restrictive practices, cushy public sector sinecures etc of the 70's.

In practice we should not prevent outsourcing, as that does no-one any favours. I don't think people are saying that outsourcing per se is wrong. As others have said, we must make our economy more competitive so that we can compete on a level playing field. Whereas the Jocks that run this country are making it less competitive day by day: more regulation, more tax, more pettiness.

[benn0]

Hypocrisy. You accept this reality, but deplore the reality of taming the unions, restrictive practices, cushy public sector sinecures etc of the 70's.

In practice we should not prevent outsourcing, as that does no-one any favours. I don't think people are saying that outsourcing per se is wrong. As others have said, we must make our economy more competitive so that we can compete on a level playing field. Whereas the Jocks that run this country are making it less competitive day by day: more regulation, more tax, more pettiness.

I accept the reality of the current situation but thatcher's policies were based upon using the likes of the (at that time still profitable) mining, manufacturing, and building industries as sacrificial lambs to further her own political interests.

Also, my head is not stuck up Blair's backpassage, unlike most of you lot with maggie.

[expat]

We could all work for less IF we didn't have the highest total tax burden in the world.

Greetings from Switzerland. No, low tax doesn't mean low prices and therefore feasibly lower earnings. It looks the other way round to me.

[The Master]

I accept the reality of the current situation but thatcher's policies were based upon using the likes of the (at that time still profitable) mining, manufacturing, and building industries as sacrificial lambs to further her own political interests.

Also, my head is not stuck up Blair's backpassage, unlike most of you lot with maggie.

I thought you left this board in disgust?

[stackpole]

I thought you left this board in disgust?

So did I.

benn0, nice to see you back. You might be naive, but without diversity we would end up in an evolutionary cul de sac, like the welsh.

[Fungus]

... thatcher's policies were based upon using the likes of the (at that time still profitable) mining, manufacturing, and building industries as sacrificial lambs to further her own political interests.

What a pile of complete bollux. She furthered the interests of the working classes far more than Teflon et al: selling council homes cheap, increasing access to higher/further education, creating a strong competitive economy.

What is Teflon doing? Making homes unaffordable (a fact not an opinion). Reducing social mobility (a fact not an opinion). Increasing unemployment and employment simultaneously (a fact). Massively increasing the number of public sector bureacrats and massively increasing the salaries of public sector administrators (a fact). Screwing up the home office (due presumably to the ineffectual Jack Straw). Massively increasing public sector expenditure for small gain (because most of the money has gone to salaries). Screwing up housing regeneration in a flood plain (Kent) and the North East (demolishing good houses). Corruption, sleaze and general grime. Sigh.

[vetran]

work for a quarter of wages

I'll happily work for 10 times the average salary in my home country, the equivalent of a quarter of your wages in India.

Lower cost base, lower taxation etc.

Of course it will all equalise, but who starves first? I wonder if the 'low cost countries' will send us AID so B'liar and Gordo can buy private jets and Cherie can afford a few hundred shoes?

[DodgyAgent]

I accept the reality of the current situation but thatcher's policies were based upon using the likes of the (at that time still profitable) mining, manufacturing, and building industries as sacrificial lambs to further her own political interests.

Also, my head is not stuck up Blair's backpassage, unlike most of you lot with maggie.

So are you saying that mining should have remained subsidised?

Like a lot of bigots your dogma means that instead of arguing as to whether Thatcher's policies were born of economic necessity and implemented in the most effective way (or not?), you have turned the debate into a personal one. In other words you are neatly sidestepping the basic argument and saying that Thatcher's policies were driven by political prejudices.

What you also fail to grasp is that the political agenda at the time was driven by economic necessity (if not then argue it), so the two are inextricably linked.

No one has said on this board that Margaret Thatcher was wonderful,; no one has given her that "walk on water" mandate. The arguments that support Thatcher have been made purely on economic grounds not because of some personal adoration of everything she stood for. You on the other hand cannot bear to face the fact that your own personal affluence and tha fact that the UK economy is the 4th largest in the world is largely thanks to her.

[John Galt]

So are you saying that mining should have remained subsidised?

Like a lot of bigots your dogma means that instead of arguing as to whether Thatcher's policies were born of economic necessity and implemented in the most effective way (or not?), you have turned the debate into a personal one. In other words you are neatly sidestepping the basic argument and saying that Thatcher's policies were driven by political prejudices.

What you also fail to grasp is that the political agenda at the time was driven by economic necessity (if not then argue it), so the two are inextricably linked.

No one has said on this board that Margaret Thatcher was wonderful,; no one has given her that "walk on water" mandate. The arguments that support Thatcher have been made purely on economic grounds not because of some personal adoration of everything she stood for. You on the other hand cannot bear to face the fact that your own personal affluence and tha fact that the UK economy is the 4th largest in the world is largely thanks to her.

Dodgy, dodgy, dodgy - remove hat find brick construction, stand in front and nod repeatedly. This will have the same effect as a conversation with Benn0 and will probably be much less painful

[Fungus]

Dodgy, dodgy, dodgy - remove hat find brick construction, stand in front and nod repeatedly. This will have the same effect as a conversation with Benn0 and will probably be much less painful

They are also of a similar intellectual level. (Am I being unfair to brick constructions?)