Atomic Systems

Moving jobs abroad obviously is of great benefit to UK citizens. Less work to do which means more time for trainspotting

OK, a thicko question.

Has all mail ceased to be carried by rail or is it that sorting on trains has ceased?

Rail has probably answered this many times but I'm too lazy to trawl through all the political garbage contained in it

Goingnorth wrote: And what about the 6 million on the sick
6 million part time workers
and 2 million college and university students

What's that phrase about statistics?

Kevo00 wrote:I think that misses BigVern's point entirely as the issue here is not really the UK's wealth as a whole - that report does not mention who gets the $1.14, but it goes without saying that it won't be the person that lost their job to the person being paid less than $0.33 in India. I totally fail to see how the $1.14 really benefits the ordinary person at all when it will simply go into the pockets of the company and subsequently its owners. Most likely they will even manage to evade paying the full tax due on that $1.14.

But the issue is the UK's wealth as a whole. The quoted $1.14 of benefit when outsourcing means that for every $1 of spending sent overseas the economy of the country that is sending the spending abroad benefits to the amount of $1.14 - not one person or one country but the whole economy of that country. This $1.14 is made up of things like savings to customers and the value of labour re-employed in the economy.

Similarly the $0.33 of benefit quoted for India does not mean that an individual employee in India gets paid that amount of money for taking on a job that was previously located in a foreign country. It means that the economy of India benefits to the tune of $0.33 through such things as increased government and state taxes for example. This is how you arrive at the win-win situation - moving low value jobs overseas can contribute to the growth of the economy of both countries involved and a growing economy is surely good for everyone.