Re: Re:(OT) Outsourcing developer to India and China - As an Oracle developer I am miffed

"Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message news:3f858e00$0$28122$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...

> Sorry Noons. That's not what the word means. You can throw in the phrase
> 'non-religious' to get close, but it has none of the implications of
> non-elected, rigid or absolutist you wish to imbue it with.

I guess that is why it's commonly used to signify precisely monarchies with their on-going, non-elected, family inherited power structure, ie, secularity... Macq dict is on-line. ;)

> I don't know where you're getting this stuff from, but it's simply not true
> (and I have a thesis on economic history of the 18th century you can read
> if you like). So we aren't going to get anywhere with this.

Are you trying to tell me that in 1700-1799 (18th century) democracy was rampant and widespread and there was no social inequality whatsoever and the economy was ruled by free market forces? So, all that french revolution stuff and Marx jazz was because of what, gardening?

> Again, define succeeded. The war was going full-pelt by 1965. It ended in
> 1973. So just how that counts as success, I can't fathom.

And the strongest protests were in 1970-71. I don't call a stop in 1973 exactly a failure of the said...

> Noons, you'll have to brush up on your history. Nixon wasn't impeached: he
> resigned before it got to that point.

So what? You're splitting hairs. The guy got out because he was dishonest. That is the point. The technicalities of how or where or who are irrelevant. As much as he was to the outcome of the war.

> And in any case, you might recall a
> certain burglary had rather more to do with the near-impeachment than the
> Vietnam War

I didn't say the Nam war protests were the cause of him leaving. What I said is that Nixon was irrelevant to the outcome of the protests. Which was the stoppage of the war.

> Cambodia was one of the weakest of the proposed articles). And 4 years
> isn't an 'abberation' in any case (and I have a masters thesis on the
> Vietnam war, too, if you're interested).

'sOK, I just lived through it.

> You are welcome to believe all this stuff Noons, but I can't discuss it with
> you when you invent history,

Where?

> ignore 2 centuries of economic thought,

I didn't say I ignore it. I just do not believe it is the be all and end all of everything to do with economic theory. There is a difference.

> invest
> words with meanings they never had before

Like I said: it's in the dictionary.

> and make demonstrably hazy claims
> like 'they had no services in the 18th century'.

Mostly crafts. Not services in a free market. Which is the presupposed environment for supply and demand laws.

> We apparently just don't
> speak the same language about the issue, so we'll have to leave it there.
>

No worries.

-- 
Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam