Sensational-Adelaide.com

claybro wrote:

Dog wrote:A well known SA analogy and example of poor Liberal economic management is the southern expressway, now costing a Labor government $450 m to fix the half built road that probably would have only cost us $200m to build properly in the first place!

Dog, do you actually believe what you write, or is it just designed to draw a response?

Claybro, I put the same question to you!

As an example of your complete political bias you state the above. Have you forgotten that at the time of the one way Southern expressway, the state was recovering from near bankruptcy as a result of the complete mis-management of the State Bank under a Labor state government.

The State Bank had lost over two billion dollars under a Labor government that had foolishly assumed that the State Bank's auditors hadn't said there was a problem therefore there wasn't a problem. But the idea that SA was near bankruptcy was a Liberal Party invention that caused nearly as much damage!

Despite this, during this period and what is often conveniently overlooked is that the Liberal state government managed to complete the Heysen Tunnels and Mt Barker freeway, a massive undertaking albeit with federal funding as well. Also, and surprisingly for a Liberal government, completed replacement of the whole suburban rail fleet.

Managed to complete means didn't cancel. Commendable, but hardly an impressive achievement. And the new railcars were originally only leased until the Federal (Labor) government funded a purchase of them. The state Labor government had made the mistake of buying more diesel railcars instead of electrifying the system (although that decision was made on departmental advice).

The "one way" expressway was only ever designed as a stop gap measure, with financial constraints in mind, and to try to win votes down South. So please present the full story.

We were told at the time that provision had been made for it to be duplicated eventually. They failed to tell us the full story: the bridges weren't designed with duplication in mind, and the eventual duplication cost far more than building it right in the first place would have.

Labor governments have presided over some of the greatest financial disasters in our history. As for the NBN, don't believe that should Labor win the election, it will continue to be rolled out as promised. Word is, the whole project is in such disarray, that even a Labor government will need to go back to the drawing board.

Would that by any chance be word from the Murdoch press trying to minimize the threat to Foxtel's monopoly?

The Opposition's NBN plan is very like a one way expressway - much less useful for a slight cost saving, and will eventually have to be upgraded to FTTH at a much greater cost than doing it right to begin with.

A track record of poor Liberal infrastructure projects planned around political expediency rather than long term planning has everything to do with the NBN, as they look like doing it again.

One source for information that's in the public domain is the AFR's Broadband Battleground page.

http://www.afr.com/nbn

drsmith wrote:One source for information that's in the public domain is the AFR's Broadband Battleground page.

Thank you Dr Smith

This might also be of interest.

Labor's $40bn NBN = 7.2 years of Abbott's Liberals parental benefits scheme. To think that we could build an infrastructure project the size of the NBN every 7 years is nation building. Giving women up to $75,000 for 6 months off work for each child is just a total waste of opportunity.

The Coalition's PPL scheme is over the top, but that's perhaps another topic of discussion.

So what is the Liberal logic of doing a cheaper NBN, might have some legs if its about getting back to surplus earlier. But if they are going to burn money anyway on welfare for rich mums what the ? Build it properly the first time.!

Dog wrote:So what is the Liberal logic of doing a cheaper NBN, might have some legs if its about getting back to surplus earlier.

Absolutely not! Trying to rush back to surplus is bad for the economy, ss everywhere that has tried it has demonstrated.

But if they are going to burn money anyway on welfare for rich mums what the ?

Yes, we know. Repeatinng it here won't help your cause - it just gets tiresome. In fact all your posts lately have been tiresome. I'd be more interested if you actually disagreed with the government on something.

Build it properly the first time.!

Most people here are of that opinion. You've said nothing new, so do you honestly think you'll change the opinion of those who don't?

Two more recent items on Australia's broadband.

Video:
Trying to sell Abbott's Internet to the rest of the world.
By IWantMyNBN
http://abbottsinternet.com.au

'Coalition's "on demand" offer could see users hit for $4k to connect.'
The Australian (IT section)
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/austral ... 6704552716

Loved that little movie clip!

Dog wrote:Labor's $40bn NBN = 7.2 years of Abbott's Liberals parental benefits scheme. To think that we could build an infrastructure project the size of the NBN every 7 years is nation building. Giving women up to $75,000 for 6 months off work for each child is just a total waste of opportunity.

Now this is the message that Rudd and Labor should be pushing through to the electorate!

Vee wrote: 'Coalition's "on demand" offer could see users hit for $4k to connect.'
The Australian (IT section)
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/austral ... 6704552716

Malcolm Turnbull has put out a clarification to the news item quoted above in The Australian.
Read below:
Clarification on fibre on demand costs - Malcolm Turnbull
http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media ... mand-costs

Here is one paragraph from his 'clarification' which puzzles me.

That is, once a single household requests a fibre on demand product, it becomes cheaper to provision fibre to anyone else in the street whose premises have been passed to order a service at a later date, and that is reflected in the deployment charges.

Does this mean the first in the street to buy in to the 'fibre on demand' pay 'through the nose' and make it cheaper for those who buy in later!!! How unfair is that?

And many people will not be able to pay the huge upfront charges to get fibre to the home/premises - the Digital Divide.

Chasers view of the NBN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mH7NVjiXRk

Shaun Micallef: Australia's NBN proposals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lp5lTcCMmw4

Dog wrote:So what is the Liberal logic of doing a cheaper NBN, might have some legs if its about getting back to surplus earlier. But if they are going to burn money anyway on welfare for rich mums what the ? Build it properly the first time.!

The Liberal reasoning is Labour promised to build a FTTN network, so we're going to build just that. Never mind it was proven unworkable and the technology is out of date now anyway.
In other words it's sheer bloody mindedness, no common sense is being applied.

fabricator wrote:Chasers view of the NBN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mH7NVjiXRk

Shaun Micallef: Australia's NBN proposals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lp5lTcCMmw4

Dog wrote:So what is the Liberal logic of doing a cheaper NBN, might have some legs if its about getting back to surplus earlier. But if they are going to burn money anyway on welfare for rich mums what the ? Build it properly the first time.!

The Liberal reasoning is Labour promised to build a FTTN network, so we're going to build just that. Never mind it was proven unworkable and the technology is out of date now anyway.
In other words it's sheer bloody mindedness, no common sense is being applied.

No! The Liberal reasoning is that, as most realistic people now know, that there is no way that Labor was ever going to connect every home in Australia for anywhere near $40 billion (the figure rises almost monthly). That it was never going to be connected in the timeframe promised, regardless of the billions thrown at it, and that very many people with access to fibre will not need it (far lower than forecast take-up).
They realise that many voters were/are nervous about the ever rising cost of FTTH
Even if Labor win the election, FTTH will not be rolled out as promised, due to cost over-runs and logistical issues and only extreme political bias overlooks the current state of NBN rollout. Surely the Labor voters must realise why the government is not out there promoting NBN as the great achievement of our time.
As for already out-dated and supposedly unworkable technology of FTTN, it seems from all information I can gather to work fine in countries that have used this method so far.