The word "work" can mean different things to different people. In this case it may mean "enables c-level management to cut expenses and show short-term profits so they can sell the company."

I think it hardly ever works in the sense of "makes for better and more cost-efficient information systems in the long term."

Over the years I've worked on several expensive IT contracts whose purpose was to bring failed outsourcing projects back in-house.

Exactly: it's depressing, but working software really can be created by throwing dozens or hundreds of junior-level developers at it.

I'm just not interested in working on any problem domain where that's the best approach.

This is also true for astrology.

and homeopathy.

> Outsourcing works, else it would not still exist.

Isn't this like saying, "Thousands of satisfied customers can't be wrong?" Thousands of customers can be wrong. Thousands of companies can pay dearly for outsourced services that end up hurting their business.

That's like saying, "the market is always right; if it seems like it sometimes isn't, trust me, it is."

You're simultaneously misrepresenting jeb's statement and the efficient market hypothesis[1].

It's more like saying "markets aren't always right, but they're useful, otherwise they wouldn't exist".

The efficient market hypothesis says "the market may be wrong sometimes, but you can't consistently tell when".

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficient-market_hypothesis