Europe (especially UK), while still a lot better better paying than the US is not really that far behind them on the downwards slope on rates of pay and the visa/outsourcing problems. The 'benefits' though remain better across the board, but that's generally a national things rather than sector specific

Don't know about him, but last time i looked (development) i would have to take about 10-20% paycut for an increase of working hours of about 40% if i worked again in the US. 'Benefits' are not much of concern in Europe as the US. But rates have been pretty stagnant/on the decline overall since about 2001 when inflation is taken into consideration

We do nearly the exact opposite, we save the company's gold (unless it's an IT company...then we do make gold out of thin air)

Hell most large company's today, could not even exist without IT no matter how many staff they hired

There is nothing arbitrary about it, it's basic supply and demand. If there's a skill shortage the price goes up. If it goes up enough supply will increase (people training for and moving to that sector) which will either stabilize or bring down prices again

The problem is, these so called capitalists/free marketers don't like the market when it costs them and try to circumvent it, either by paying off politicians for tax cuts to make offshoreing more viable or by either abusing existing visa regulation so they can import cheap labor or once again paying off politicians to change the regulations to suit themselves

Which in turn reduces prices locally, which means less people enter the market, which starts to once again generate a skills shortage, but instead of market forces being allowed to play out, for the capitalists it's back once again to the politicians with money in hand

Down the road we are going there will soon be no one left locally with the skills because they have been undercut so much that they will better off working at McDonald's flipping burgers

Networks and development are two totally different skill sets/job roles as different as night and day,rare to find someone who even wants to do both never mind have the actual skills (and if they do it's because they left one role in pursuit of the other and doubtful they would want to go backwards career wise to doing both), so no wonder you are having difficulties. The security clearance just makes it even worse

I would imagine most of the CV's you are getting are from people who want to make the career transition and thus are blagging half their skill set, so either you are going to need to break it into two roles or accept someone learning on the job.

Though what you are asking for, someone with skill sets from multiple roles is a pretty common requirement that i see , normally because the last guy in the job did that. What you forget is the last guy left, most likely because he used you to transition his career already and you are now advertising a spec for a transitional role while demanding a skill set on par with those who already completed the transition.

Company's need to stop hiring just based on what the skill-set of the last guy was but rather look back at what his role was originally and what it is now and compare the two and decide if the job as it is now should be broken up into various roles

They should, but those "job creators" pay a lot of money to politicians not to be subject to market forces when it suits them

Except "they" did not change the day or declare the jubilee a bank holiday, Government did (Labour if i remember correctly). Queen has no authority in creating laws or policy's beyond rubber stamping government policy's. Hell if they even try to talk publicly (or get caught trying to influence privately) about policy's/laws they would like changed/implemented they get lamblasted so in some ways they have less rights that the average citizen

It's more of a question of how bad the UK AND the US justice system is, as recent cases have proven, if the US does not get what they want out of the UK justice system, they can and will demand extradition and it will be granted due to the stupid one sided treaty. So even if the UK system finds them innocent (or refuses to hear the case) they will still face a few month's/years in a US jail awaiting trial in the US and with all the costs that entails

Little chance of them even trying, ITV have a pretty large legal team themselves with international experience (as ITV channel as well as it's programs are rebroadcast in many country's in the world) in both copyright and trademark. It will be either Apple TV or something like iTele. Though either way i will not be a customer.

Place Europe on a map? Aiming a bit high there for them i think, would settle for them recognising that Europe is not a country

It can be a bit cheaper if you subscribe but not much. Simple fact is unlike with the US the subscription model for magazines never really took off in the UK no matter how hard they tried. UK consumer did not like making the commitment when they could walk down the street and buy the magazine when it suited them

Which could explain the difference in quality in the magazines between counties, in many ways magazines in the US are trying compete at a brand subscription level (it's where the bulk of their sales are done) , aka give you good enough "deal" to to entice you to subscribe and then do just enough to make sure you are not motivated enough to cancel the subscription (considerably easier that trying to motivate you to actively renew, hence why they all automatically renew) where as magazines in the UK have not only compete with their competitors mag right next to theirs every day but also convince the consumer it's worth buying....with every single issue

Couple of bad issues (uninteresting cover/main articles) would cause barely a blip on US magazines revenues as majority of their customers are subscriptions where as for UK mag it could mean closure