for some countries, it is strategic.
in case one country places an embargo, you still have the aircraft of the other country to use.
or to appear neutral..etc
like Greece and their issues with Turkey (thus buying French and US)
or Finland scared of USSR (so buying western and soviet).
its an expensive but more strategically redundant

I would like to say India’s rational MIGHT be because they are scared of another US embargo..
but I think more likely, its because of poor planning. That MMRCA took soo long that only now they realized they don’t have enough airplanes and now need to quickly buy something off the shelf. Also gov’ts fault Tejas took soo long, not enough are out.

That would be sound rational for buying Su-30s, HAL FGFA development (for stealth aircraft) and a Western type for sure, but with all the other types it just gets silly. If I were India, I would arm with Su-30s and one Western type and then replace Su-30s with HAL FGFA/PAK-FA when available.

I think maybe it’s a shortage of funds, which is causing this piecemeal approach and in turn leading to a shortage of funds… and around in circles.

No. ‘Socialising the wealthy’ is drivel. What do you imagine socialism is?

Socialism, is a reallocation of wealth facilitated by the taxpayer, so yes, it is perfectly possible to be subsidising the wealthy, and there are various forms of this, from rampant tax avoidance, to cushy government contracts, revolving door employment, corruption, cartels, insider trading, bailouts and allowing them to benefit from cheap labour immigration that the taxpayer pays the cost of.

I agree with all of that. Reducing the number of low paid jobs filled by immigrants is going to be the hardest task the government faces. I note that Keir Starmer got it completely wrong when he said that we needed to upskill the working British population, to fill the posts being taken by foreign workers. They aren’t the problem..

In other news, it is estimated that the fall in the value of the pound (which is doing wonders for the FTSE), will see an increase in inflation of 4-5% – and fast. This is when Brexit will start to bite the average person, and it will likely be some time before March as well.

In terms of essentials, inflation has been at that figure for some time really.

As regards low skilled jobs, it’s cheaper overall to pay an unemployed British person £10/hour to do the job than pay an immigrant £7/hour, even if the government makes up the difference. They’re already paying that difference in benefits to the unemployed person anyway, so why increase the burden on public services and queue sizes as well as paying it? Failing that, just don’t fill the jobs, still cheaper than filling them with immigrants. If something isn’t making money overall for UK plc, then if the worst comes to the worst, just stop doing it.

Another idea would be to actively match unemployed people to jobs and force them to do them, except this time around, make sure the employer pays the wages.

I can’t believe that you dare quoting something like that when you were dissing the french Mica test as making no sense operationally.

You really are a lunatic.

Nic

They’re not my words. I’m only using them to point out that doing it with HMD alone is perfectly possible. Two ways of looking at it, the pilot isn’t always going to be looking over their shoulder and having a secondary designator is useful but having a standalone capability is also useful. The best situation is the F-35, that doesn’t need secondary aircraft or the pilot to look over their shoulder.

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/india-unlikely-to-buy-additional-rafale-fighter-jets-mod-source-says

India Unlikely To Buy Additional Rafale Fighter Jets, MoD Source Says

Yes, and some that earn much more, but for every person on above average earnings there are several on below average earnings, that was my point. ‘Most people’ earn well below the national average wage.

It’s not that we keep ‘taking in’ people that earn less than the national average, it is that the jobs pay less than the national average (and our own population are reluctant to do those jobs at that rate).

And employers seem to want foreign workers, and not because they are cheaper either:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10426473/Why-hire-foreigners-They-just-work-harder.html

That’s why it’s called an average. And that average generates an average tax revenue. If we drag that average down continuously, what happens?

So basically generalisations and discrimination by employers, and why many jobs were not even advertised in the UK.

Yes, and if we can’t get British people to do those jobs, then unless they are essential to the nation, they should just scrap them. Bringing in labour that’s so low income that it costs the country money is senseless. You still end up paying benefits to the unemployed anyway, and you have additional pressure on public services. Let’s look at your own link.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/10638283/How-much-we-give-the-state-in-tax-and-how-much-we-get-back.html

How many Eastern European immigrant households are earning >£38,000/year? That basically means two people earning £10/hour or more. Not many.

Fair point Bas – was more about the ‘system’ than the colour in this case. Starfish – you have just used ‘LOL’ to emphasise a debating point. Unless there was a joke in there I missed, you need to work on your discourse or find a more suitable forum. Youtube comments might suit.

Have you ever heard the phrase ‘Not a part of the solution, part of the problem’?

If you really think being ‘in touch with public opinion’ helps a rational political argument then there is little point discussing this any further. It helps get votes when you are unable to change public opinion through poor rhetorical skills or just having a rubbish product to sell, but I am not asking for your vote. You go back to attacking ‘Socialism for employers’ or whatever you’ve been told is the problem.

I don’t expect Corbyn to do well. But a little political education along the way looks like it might be helpful, and it isn’t going to come from ‘Down with elites, up with grammar schools’ May.

Those three letters describe Corbyn perfectly. He has several completely unsaleable policies, one of which is scrapping Trident, then you have blocking military action against ISIS.

Socialism is socialism, whether it’s for the rich or the poor, however socialising the wealthy is senseless.

As regards education, local schools were far better in the early ’90s than they were in 2010.