lets welcome more indian nationals into the country to work in tech business

[sasguru]

So you're a .net dev.
Easy to learn, requires only an average IQ, no barriers to entry.
What will you do when you get bobbed?
And if you think you won't be why not?

No reply from robby.
Looks like he hasn't thought about his future career as a barista in the global economy
Or perhaps somehow he hopes to become a barrister?

[eek]

Easy to learn, requires only an average IQ, no barriers to entry.
What will you do when you get bobbed?

So you're a .net dev.
Easy to learn, requires only an average IQ, no barriers to entry.
What will you do when you get bobbed?
And if you think you won't be why not?

are you on repeat today?

[Robinho]

Are you sure about that.

I'm very sorry that you don't understand basic supply and demand. Maybe you should go and study that before we continue this debate.

How? Its not being spent on services locally (as it otherwise would be). Instead somewhere in Northern India a builder is buying rare materials from the local quarry. How does that help the UK?

Remember its a global economy. Once the money leaves the UK its not likely to come back this way.

Yes it is. By getting a bob in who's good at doing something, you have freed up another resource to do something the UK has a comparative advantage at. The resource can now sell stuff maybe to bob, but maybe to another country, which bob bought something from, thus the money returns to the UK.

It's really no different to importing good from abroad.

[MyUserName]

Yes it is. By getting a bob in who's good at doing something,

Ah ... I think I have spotted a flaw here ... anyway lets carry on:

you have freed up another resource to do something the UK has a comparative advantage at. The resource can now sell stuff maybe to bob, but maybe to another country, which bob bought something from, thus the money returns to the UK.

So I lose my job because a bob undercuts me ... then I sell stuff? Do you mean my possessions to pay my mortgage? Okay, once they are gone what do I sell?

Also, how do ensure I sell them abroad for the same money I would have got if I had kept my job here? If I do not then some money has left which is not coming back in this model.

[Robinho]

I do have a plan B btw sas.

Certainly not resting on my laurels that IT contracting is going to be around forever.

[eek]

I'm very sorry that you don't understand basic supply and demand. Maybe you should go and study that before we continue this debate.



Yes it is. By getting a bob in who's good at doing something, you have freed up another resource to do something the UK has a comparative advantage at. The resource can now sell stuff maybe to bob, but maybe to another country, which bob bought something from, thus the money returns to the UK.

Its clear you don't know what you are talking about. The real world is not a perfect (competition) market where demand raises as prices falls. Also you forget that people can't change skill sets at the drop of a hat.

May I suggest you come back when you actually know what you are talking about rather than sprouting stuff that falls apart once we start (even vaguely) thinking about it.

[Robinho]

Its clear you don't know what you are talking about. The real world is not a perfect (competition) market where demand raises as prices falls. Also you forget that people can't change skill sets at the drop of a hat.

May I suggest you come back when you actually know what you are talking about rather than sprouting stuff that falls apart once we start (even vaguely) thinking about it.

You think you're finding flaws you are just describing micro short term issues and not long term macro trends which is all that is relevant.

It also assumes a sudden unleashment of bobs, in the long run there would be a steady stream, less Brits would be attracted to IT as wages would be lower (increased supply) people would be attracted to other jobs.

Changes in the market happen all the time, technology comes and goes and job types come and go.

Failing to react to them will get you nowhere in the long run they will just lead you or an economy further down the wrong path.

[DodgyAgent]

You think you're finding flaws you are just describing micro short term issues and not long term macro trends which is all that is relevant.

It also assumes a sudden unleashment of bobs, in the long run there would be a steady stream, less Brits would be attracted to IT as wages would be lower (increased supply) people would be attracted to other jobs.

Changes in the market happen all the time, technology comes and goes and job types come and go.

Failing to react to them will get you nowhere in the long run they will just lead you or an economy further down the wrong path.

Nor do you understand that capitalism in its extreme form is very flawed. It does not allow for the fact that everyone is different, that in fulfilling its fundamental princilples (the strongest survive) it will inevitably create anti capitalist institutions (monopolies etc)
You do not seem to possess the wisdom to fathom that the main challenge today is how we to pick out and control the best aspects of capitalism to benefit the whole of society and there is more to life than making money.
On the fringes of this debate are people like you who believe in total capitalism - despite its flaws - or communism.

[Robinho]

Nor do you understand that capitalism in its extreme form is very flawed.

It really isn't, there are some regrettable things about it but there's no way it's deeply flawed. The current mess we have whatever you want to call it, is certainly deeply flawed.

It does not allow for the fact that everyone is different,

Err, yes it does, division of labour is a fundamental part of capitalism.

that in fulfilling its fundamental princilples (the strongest survive)

Capitalism is not the survival of the fittest. In the wild, an animal survives by capturing prey and eating it (force). With capitalism, you can only embark in voluntary transaction free from fraud or theft. In a voluntary transaction both people win, otherwise, they would not voluntarily take part in them. Thus capitalism rewards people who can help the others the most. You can only enrich yourself by enriching others, you don't enrich yourself at the expense of others.

it will inevitably create anti capitalist institutions (monopolies etc)

The government creates far more monopolies than it prevents. Money, Education, Health, Trains...

You do not seem to possess the wisdom to fathom that the main challenge today is how we to pick out and control the best aspects of capitalism to benefit the whole of society and there is more to life than making money.
On the fringes of this debate are people like you who believe in total capitalism - despite its flaws - or communism.

For me the only area the gov needs to redistribute wealth is to children (health, education), so that everyone gets a chance in life. Equal chance, but not equal outcomes.

Also, the genuinely disadvantaged ie born disabled etc (though i'd hope charity would help here).

is more to life than making money.

I agree, i don't preach money, i preach freedom, freedom to do business with and who you want without the government taxing or regulating you to death. Or Freedom to not do business, if you don't want to, you can live off the land, or you can spend your whole life on drugs if you want. But you can't live at the expense of others, as that is an encroachment of their freedom.

[SueEllen]

It really isn't, there are some regrettable things about it but there's no way it's deeply flawed. The current mess we have whatever you want to call it, is certainly deeply flawed.

Who invented all systems, models and theories - humans.

Are humans perfect - no.

Therefore any system invented by a human is imperfect.

I think you should do some Game Theory as it will teach you a lot about humans.