I don't think we can possibly thing that we aren't going to the cloud at some point, but too often, I find that "cloud" is poorly defined.
I'm a greater fan of internal cloud computing (ie Virtualization - VMware, Hyper-V, Xen, etc), but it's difficult to think that some things will not go to the cloud.
One example the Spam filter and a Secure Web Gateway. It's impossible to protect primarily mobile users without sending the traffic through the cloud - we'd have to send them back to the office, then out to the internet - quasi VPN style. I'd imagine that could add some latency and be a bit ridiculous, and incur greater costs in bandwidth at the office.
I think it's unfortunate that 9,000 people are losing their jobs, but in some ways moving to centralized processing and management only makes sense. I like to keep things in house as much as possible, since I think the cloud can present some privacy concerns, but some thing are just going to move that way.
In some ways it does allow enterprise applications for smaller businesses, but in discussions, it makes sense, at times, to allow a company that is an expert in one area deal with that traffic - examples are SPAM, e-mail, proxy servers, etc. Sometimes it makes more sense to do it that way, instead of having an admin split their time being a "jack of all trades," or instead of hiring more people to do that task.
Those are interesting points. I guess part of the benefit of cloud computing is using centralized resources, but you still don't want a single point of failure. I would imagine multiple data centers, or a hot-site to mitigate this risk.