Election Issues: National Broadband network

[Matt Porter]

rcon, I resent your attempt to try to rebut my weakly constructed and largely biased argument with fact.

[rcon]

rcon, I resent your attempt to try to rebut my weakly constructed and largely biased argument with fact.

WINNER! That made me laugh

[Matt Porter]

I recently read an article (which I conveniently can't find atm) from pre/mid-GFC stating that RBA directors (possibly Professor McKibbin) had directed the Govt to "spend as much and as quickly as it could". That the actual projects were not as important as just getting the money out there. That's what they did.
I realise K Rudd had many issues working against him, and mostly of his own doing, I personally think it's an injustice that K Rudd was the only one to lose his job in the wake of the GFC. I think he should've been given the opportunity to fight this election and let the people, not the party, determine his future. obviously, i'm a labor voter, and i believe we're pushing the proverbial up an incline to get ahead in this election.
My main issue for this election is "Who do I believe is the best man for the job?", and in this case I think it's Gillard by plenty. I know we should vote the party, not the person, but Abbott's views frighten the hell out of me. I really dont think he represents a nation which is 'moving forward', just as I believe little Johnny wasn't a great example of forward thinking and planning (although, obviously it was a much better result to have Howard than Beazley or Latham).
I really dont think there's much difference between the 2 parties these days, but I do enjoy the discussion. Although I consider myself a labor voter, I have in the past, given my vote to other parties if I believed there was an valid opportunity for improvement in the status quo.

Question without notice: Should we vote for the party that promises the most for us as individuals, or for the nation as a whole?

[rcon]

White Elephant. Period.

http://www.electronista.com/articles/10 ... z0wzgwGcBk
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/techn ... h;&emc;=th

Hardly a killer blow, but just where will we be in 5-10 years?

[bennymacca]

White Elephant. Period.

http://www.electronista.com/articles/10 ... z0wzgwGcBk
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/techn ... h;&emc;=th

Hardly a killer blow, but just where will we be in 5-10 years?

what about the reports that fibre to the home will deliver up to 1gigabit in future?

[gundog]

Did anyone bother to watch the Peoples Forum featuring Gillard and Abbott.

Before Abbott faced the public questioning a jurno made a reference to the NBN costing in the vacinity of $5,000 per home, whilst I'm some sceptical that the figure quoted is so high, I tried a search for info but I had no success.

Am I to believe that is an accurate amount, if it is correct then we would be looking at a approximatly 20 years before the network would be paid for based on $40 per month with at least 40% profit for the IP.

And the other thing that greatly worried me was Julia, when questioned about the Internet filter, Julia confirmed that it is part of her govt's program, whilst the government would not decide what you can or cannot look at or download, that decision would be made by something similar to the censorship board, and sites would be rated similar to movie ratings.

What kind of throttle would that place on the speed of the network whilst it checks wether the ste is approved or not.

[rcon]

what about the reports that fibre to the home will deliver up to 1gigabit in future?

I'm going to quote opportunity cost here. Sure, at some point, you might be able to get the 1gb/s, and even make use of it.

What could you have done for the country with that money in the meantime, and is that really of greater public good than the alternatives?

I completely agree with you that fiber will server what we currently predict our needs to be for quite some time to come. Where is disagree is in that we could not achieve something of comparable utility (granted, on the downside) to the community through what coalition is proposing.

Everything is awesome when you put it on credit.

Gundog raises an interesting point - you do realise voting for the NBN is a vote to allow the government to enforce EXISTING laws banning online poker? Illegal content will be "filtered" out and that includes online poker.

[rcon]

What an arrogant, er, so and so. They did not get elected to bring us this version of the NBN, but rather FTTN I believe. And to suggest people wanting to see what benefits you get for the most expensive investment in the nations history are purely partisan.... its this kind of crap that makes me so bitter about this government.

http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/357528 ... en_conroy/?

NBN Co CEO, Mike Quigley, has said he will provide you with a business case and await your approval to release it. Will you do so?

SC: No, I’ve said very clearly we will not be releasing the business case.

Why not?

SC: Because we didn’t release Telstra’s when it was in public hands, we don’t release Australia Post’s and we’ve got no intention of releasing NBN Co’s.

But can you understand the public angst over the fact that there’s no cost-benefit analysis or business case for this investment?

SC: This is entirely a manufactured, confected debate started by the Liberal Party to try and slow down [the NBN] so they could claim coming into this election that there’d been no connections. They wanted a delay simply for political reasons.

But I’ve spoken to people in the industry that support the NBN while wanting a business case or cost-benefit analysis.

SC: Waste of time, waste of effort, waste of money.

So you say there’s no one who genuinely believes in getting it without an ulterior motive?

SC: Waste of time, waste of effort, waste of money. We’re actually building the NBN as we said we would and as the Australian people elected us to.

[gundog]

In effect Conroy is stating that the charter of NBN Co is heres a bucket load of cash, dont worry too much about a business plan or any form of analysis, as this is a waste of money and time, just go out and spend it.

We want a NBN just go and build it, we will worry the details later.

With someone like Conroy running the agenda of the NBN are you going to get value for money?

While Conroy admits he cannot get his filter up unless its able to clear the Senate, but if the Greens win the balance of power in the Senate, a deal will be done and the filter will come in, and we will have censorship similar may other countries around the world.

[Gaz787]

While Conroy admits he cannot get his filter up unless its able to clear the Senate, but if the Greens win the balance of power in the Senate, a deal will be done and the filter will come in, and we will have censorship similar may other countries around the world.

The Greens oppose the filter, but approve of the NBN.

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/techno ... 1267o.html

There is nothing to indicate "a deal will be struck".