Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

[MacDougall]

I can't stand the people who cannot weigh up the cost benefit of the NBN. It's usually met with poor broad examples of it's 'future' applications, that can be done with today's infrastructure, or one of my favorites, where someone act's like they are all big picture thinking and say 'we haven't yet imagined the uses for it'! Seriously. Let's build it when we have the uses for it that make financial sense then!!!!

$43bn. Does anyone know how much this actually is? We aren't talking roads or bridges to transport physical goods, the necessities of life. We are talking Data! And only FASTER data at that!!

$43billion in the hands of the Labor government! $2000 per man, woman, child, $4000 per household…. and that's not even wireless (where the future lies) OR the front end devices we need! What a massive waste this is going to be.

People toting that we need to come up to 'international standards' please look at which countries have done this with the costly landscape that we have. Yes, you got it. 0.

Here's an idea. How about we simply compile a list of people who want to pay the $4000 and subscribe to a new monthly plan, build the backbone and just connect their homes? Easy. Rather than putting our grand kids into massive debt so we can watch less grainy video's.

You really fail to see the big picture here. The whole world runs on data through the internet now. Everything. To put us ahead of the curve is setting Australia up for a huge win down the line. Countries that fail to comply will be left stranded when all information becomes available to all, anytime, anywhere.

 

[GeorgeQ]

Climate Change should be quoted as the 'the greatest load of crap of our time'. Earth's temperatures have only been recorded for 300 years, nobody has any evidence to suggest that there weren't weather patterns before recordings. Our recent Winter was one of the coldest I've experienced and the ski fields experienced some of the best dumpings of snow for 3 decades, water levels in Sydney are at 63% and there was even a stage where taking off water restrictions was considered. I believe in protecting ecosystems and forests, but I don't believe in Earth Temperatures rising.

Climate change is a fact and nobody contests that, I also dont think the cause is really contested (i.e. greenhouse gases - although solar flares, seismic activity and celestial impact are all potentially lethal). The main point of conjecture is whether or not the climate change we are seeing now is man made. Personally, I think our activities have impacted climate change; however what the impact will be I have no idea and I am not sure anyone really does.

I also think that we are well truly beyond the point of no return and our progress is irreversible - e.g. electricity. All we can really do is live with the consequences - whether thats floods, droughts, famine etc. - and hope.

 

[hammertime]

I can't stand the people who cannot weigh up the cost benefit of the NBN. It's usually met with poor broad examples of it's 'future' applications, that can be done with today's infrastructure, or one of my favorites, where someone act's like they are all big picture thinking and say 'we haven't yet imagined the uses for it'! Seriously. Let's build it when we have the uses for it that make financial sense then!!!!

$43bn. Does anyone know how much this actually is? We aren't talking roads or bridges to transport physical goods, the necessities of life. We are talking Data! And only FASTER data at that!!

$43billion in the hands of the Labor government! $2000 per man, woman, child, $4000 per household…. and that's not even wireless (where the future lies) OR the front end devices we need! What a massive waste this is going to be.

People toting that we need to come up to 'international standards' please look at which countries have done this with the costly landscape that we have. Yes, you got it. 0.

Here's an idea. How about we simply compile a list of people who want to pay the $4000 and subscribe to a new monthly plan, build the backbone and just connect their homes? Easy. Rather than putting our grand kids into massive debt so we can watch less grainy video's.

You really fail to see the big picture here. The whole world runs on data through the internet now. Everything. To put us ahead of the curve is setting Australia up for a huge win down the line. Countries that fail to comply will be left stranded when all information becomes available to all, anytime, anywhere.

I'm launching an internet company. I'm not failing to see the big picture. Do you really think connecting every home is going to give us an economic advantage? What do you need faster at home that will help us dominate the US, England etc. markets. One example. That's all I ask. I can make a case for faster connections to Hosting companies, CBD business. Not homes.

There is a reason why Labor are trying to dodge a business case. Because it looks at quantifying facts, real examples, rather than 'airy fairy' chat saying how they are 'forward thinking' or 'big picture' in an attempt to demoralize any opposition with some extremely weak examples.

Increasing the flow of physical goods at our ports, road, rail etc is far more economically beneficial than faster internet ever will. It's just that the voter wants faster Internet because they only can evaluate direct impacts to them, not indirect.

 

[Citizen_Tiger]

Pretty deep post for a 15 year old. I agree with you regarding the Labor Govt though, they will surely be ousted when the next election rolls around.

Maybe, maybe not. It may depend on how well O'Farrell and Springborg are received assuming they win their elections.

'How well receieved'? It'll take years for the Libs to develop the same number of paedophiles, rorters, opportunists and criminals that we've been blessed with in NSW over the last 16 years. I should think that they'll be 'received' as would a rescue party on Gilligan's Island..

 

[Citizen_Tiger]

Apparently it's important to 658,000 more Australians

What did you speak to them about it? What a load of tripe. Primary votes have never played any part in the formation of government apart from their raw value in getting members elected.

It's an extremely thin argument to begin with - you either lack an understanding of Australian politics or you are ignoring its realities.

Why would 'speaking to them about it' improve the credibility of the data? It's fact. What don't you understand about the numbers? Who suggested that these numbers 'played a part'? It's data that's telling, if that's not blindingly obvious to you, then perhaps it you that's cursed with a 'lack of understanding'

 

[AndTheKungFoSing]

Why would 'speaking to them about it' improve the credibility of the data? It's fact. What don't you understand about the numbers? Who suggested that these numbers 'played a part'? It's data that's telling, if that's not blindingly obvious to you, then perhaps it you that's cursed with a 'lack of understanding'

No it is NOT fact. It depends what Radio station or what channel news program you listen too… my bet is that you listen to 2GB and watch Nine News.... for the 'balanced' reporting...

Labor won in the 2 party preferred vote.. simple! Therefore the majority of the Australian electorates wanted a Labor based government...

I wonder how you felt when Howard won that election but lost in primary votes...

 

[Citizen_Tiger]

2PP was 50.01-49.99 which possibly includes Nationals votes in WA even though they aren't part of the Coalition.
Seats finished 72-72
In the divisions of the independents the majority voted against the Coalition candidates.

So let's cut the crap and deal with some reality hey?

Who mentioned two party preferred? What does '700,000 more Australians' have to do with the preferential voting system? And you know it wasn't 700, 000, as at 16/9/2010, 9am its 658,925\. That's 658,925 more people that have voted for the coalition. Its not arguable, it's a fact.

In the seats of the Independents the clear cut position was and is that the Labor party polled poorly. In Oakeshott's electorate nearly three times as many votes were polled for the National Party, as for Labor. In Windsor's New England electorate it's three times as many as well. It's not arguable it's a fact.

We have the great majority of the primary vote in favour of the coalition, 16 lost Labor seats, a minority of seats in Government and a Prime Minister that's been sworn in twice, without having ever been elected. Not to mention two Independents who clearly didn't take a decent look at the messages coming from their constituents.

There's some of the 'reality' that you're so fond of and start playing the ball, not the man

Where do we start…

Firstly, what the Coalition has in terms of primary is a plurality not a great majority or even a slight majority and that's a key difference.

Secondly the performance of other parties in Lyne etc is meaningless since a) we don't know the intention of the voters and b) they elected an independent by an overwhelming 2PP majority (I use the term 2PP for reasons of simplicity). We don't know the intention of Oakeshott voters, nobody does.

Thirdly, Prime Ministers are never elected in the sense you seem to think they are. A PM is the person who has the support of a majority of the House which Gillard has had on both occasions. All perfectly legal and in accordance with procedure.

Fourthly, any electorate who elects an independent has to deal with the consequences that entails. There's no second chance draw. If they wanted a National MP they could easily have voted National.

Fifthly, 2PP figures are mentioned because those figures decide who wins seats, not primary votes.

Lastly, when have I played the man? I don't believe I have attacked you or anyone else in this thread personally. Your arguments yes but that works both ways now doesn't it?

A 'plurality' ? Indeed, as Sam Chisolm would say 'Thanks for that blinding insight into the obvious'….

A 'majority' in the context of a 'plurality' is 50% of the primary. The coalition polled 43.3%

To contend that a vote as impossibly weak as those polled in New England and Lyne by the respective Labor candidates, is 'meaningless' in the context of the Independent's roles in the formation of a government is fanciful. The tenor of those two seats is overwhelmingly conservative.

Mate you play the man constantly. If it's not some off handed comment about one's political understanding, or accusing posters of having thin arguments, it's proposing that one lacks common sense etc etc.In fact you applied the latter when discussing Albert Field and his appointment. I found that especially astonishing given you were not even born in 1975\. I mean what would I know?, I only experienced the disaster that was the Whitlam era first hand and like millions of other Australians couldn't wait to assist him in achieving the greatest defeat in the history of Australian politics. And you want to talk about the morality of a senate appointment. God help us, Nothing like a text book revisionist.

I was happy for you to write volumes when back pedalling on the Westminster issue, because frankly, it wasn't worth a response. I'm always happy to discuss stuff with you, but not when you remain dismissive and arrogant.

 

[Yossarian]

A 'plurality' ? Indeed, as Sam Chisolm would say 'Thanks for that blinding insight into the obvious'….

A 'majority' in the context of a 'plurality' is 50% of the primary. The coalition polled 43.3%

To contend that a vote as impossibly weak as those polled in New England and Lyne by the respective Labor candidates, is 'meaningless' in the context of the Independent's roles in the formation of a government is fanciful. The tenor of those two seats is overwhelmingly conservative.

Mate you play the man constantly. If it's not some off handed comment about one's political understanding, or accusing posters of having thin arguments, it's proposing that one lacks common sense etc etc.In fact you applied the latter when discussing Albert Field and his appointment. I found that especially astonishing given you were not even born in 1975\. I mean what would I know?, I only experienced the disaster that was the Whitlam era first hand and like millions of other Australians couldn't wait to assist him in achieving the greatest defeat in the history of Australian politics. And you want to talk about the morality of a senate appointment. God help us, Nothing like a text book revisionist.

I was happy for you to write volumes when back pedalling on the Westminster issue, because frankly, it wasn't worth a response. I'm always happy to discuss stuff with you, but not when you remain dismissive and arrogant.

Yeah whatever. You clearly said a majority of the primary vote. They weren't even close to that. You don't seem to know the difference between attacking an argument and a person. Seriously what do you expect on a forum? You post a lot of stuff that I find factually incorrect and poorly constructed arguments so you have to expect to be called on it. And when that happens you sulk or claim I'm pointing out the obvious.

There are very few Labor leaning posters in this thread. I'm copping it from a stack of people but hey that's the way of forum posting isn't it? I'll leave it there and just stick to people like Stryker and Hammertime who can debate issues with passion and not get personally offended. If I talk waffle to them they're pretty quick to tell me too.

I've obviously upset you which was not my intention. Adios brother…

 

[system]

Regardless of conservative leanings the votes in the New England and Lyne electorates are a damning judgement on both major parties. In particular the Coalition.

The exit poll interviews with voters in both electorates clearly pointed the finger at the toadying nature of the National Party in its current state and the willingness of the LNP to ignore safe country seats and make political mileage out of them.

The current situation in New England (The only post election data I have been privy to at this stage) indicates that there is a roughly 50/50 split amongst declared independant voters on their support for their candidates installation of a Gillard government. The data also indicates that these same voters have a 70% confidence that the issues of the rural voter are more likely to be addressed under this arrangement than the previous coalition norm.

The satisfaction of decision is based on internal figures from both parties and the secondary figure comes directly from the coalitions internal pollsters

 

[MacDougall]

I can't stand the people who cannot weigh up the cost benefit of the NBN. It's usually met with poor broad examples of it's 'future' applications, that can be done with today's infrastructure, or one of my favorites, where someone act's like they are all big picture thinking and say 'we haven't yet imagined the uses for it'! Seriously. Let's build it when we have the uses for it that make financial sense then!!!!

$43bn. Does anyone know how much this actually is? We aren't talking roads or bridges to transport physical goods, the necessities of life. We are talking Data! And only FASTER data at that!!

$43billion in the hands of the Labor government! $2000 per man, woman, child, $4000 per household…. and that's not even wireless (where the future lies) OR the front end devices we need! What a massive waste this is going to be.

People toting that we need to come up to 'international standards' please look at which countries have done this with the costly landscape that we have. Yes, you got it. 0.

Here's an idea. How about we simply compile a list of people who want to pay the $4000 and subscribe to a new monthly plan, build the backbone and just connect their homes? Easy. Rather than putting our grand kids into massive debt so we can watch less grainy video's.

You really fail to see the big picture here. The whole world runs on data through the internet now. Everything. To put us ahead of the curve is setting Australia up for a huge win down the line. Countries that fail to comply will be left stranded when all information becomes available to all, anytime, anywhere.

What do you need faster at home that will help us dominate the US, England etc. markets. One example. That's all I ask. I can make a case for faster connections to Hosting companies, CBD business. Not homes.

It won't be a case of domination. It will be a case of keeping up with.

When we are ordering all our food by pressing buttons on the fridge. When every computer is equipped with a credit card scanner. When it becomes apparent to people that operating businesses from home is a much more affordable alternative to leasing or purchasing commercial property (which will coincide with the ability to get your seachange but keep running all your business from your toilet).

It goes without saying that we will need faster internet. Files are getting bigger and bigger so the speeds of current services will slow down.

Never mind though. These aren't big deal. You seem to know what you're talking about so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one.

 

[Yossarian]

Regardless of conservative leanings the votes in the New England and Lyne electorates are a damning judgement on both major parties. In particular the Coalition.

The exit poll interviews with voters in both electorates clearly pointed the finger at the toadying nature of the National Party in its current state and the willingness of the LNP to ignore safe country seats and make political mileage out of them.

The current situation in New England (The only post election data I have been privy to at this stage) indicates that there is a roughly 50/50 split amongst declared independant voters on their support for their candidates installation of a Gillard government. The data also indicates that these same voters have a 70% confidence that the issues of the rural voter are more likely to be addressed under this arrangement than the previous coalition norm.

The satisfaction of decision is based on internal figures from both parties and the secondary figure comes directly from the coalitions internal pollsters

And the Nationals have a big problem in this regard. Unless they can start to differentiate themselves from the Liberals they are going to lose more seats to independents. The only Nationals that seem to be doing well are the ones outside the Coalition.

 

[hammertime]

It won't be a case of domination. It will be a case of keeping up with.

When we are ordering all our food by pressing buttons on the fridge. When every computer is equipped with a credit card scanner. When it becomes apparent to people that operating businesses from home is a much more affordable alternative to leasing or purchasing commercial property (which will coincide with the ability to get your seachange but keep running all your business from your toilet).

It goes without saying that we will need faster internet. Files are getting bigger and bigger so the speeds of current services will slow down.

Never mind though. These aren't big deal. You seem to know what you're talking about so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one.

I agree with what you mentioned mate. There is a need for it to keep up with services, and there are green benefits to that when it does happen. But all that is possible now.

Faster home internet has been developed privately over the last few years without us paying a cent and it will continue to do so when it makes sense. One main this is that we do need to make sure our rural communities get access to these same services that the market won't cover.

I just think Wireless is much more forward thinking about the technologies that we will need. e.g. Fully automated farming, Car Networking (Crash avoidance), Teleconferencing anywhere.

It may not be as fast yet (techs like WiiMax are close), its cheap and creates a new world of possibilities. Technologies that will help us compete with cheap farm exports from china, or provide our car manufacturers a platform to create new tech for the rest of the world.. and we save $40billion by doing so.

 

[citizen_cub]

Lol, 10 Asylum seekers on the roof of the Villawood Detention Centre :laughing: You've really got to wonder who's in control at the end of the day, the Government or them? How much longer does this issue have to be debated for until someone pulls their finger out of their backside and take action :unamused:

 

[system]

The funniest thing about it is that none of them are the evil boat people that the parties campaigned about stopping. It was the category with the least enforcement dolars spent. Overstayed Visas. To think that the electorate was stupid enough to fall for the party lines yet again

 

[citizen_cub]

I don't see how the NBN is going to benefit those who are connected by satellite and who are already satisfied with their internet situation. i.e.myself. My internet situation is pretty good at the moment and I don't want to pay excess money just to have an optic fibre cable installed in my house. It may benefit does those who live in rural areas, but even then will it be affordable to them.

 

[Yossarian]

I don't see how the NBN is going to benefit those who are connected by satellite and who are already satisfied with their internet situation. i.e.myself. My internet situation is pretty good at the moment and I don't want to pay excess money just to have an optic fibre cable installed in my house. It may benefit does those who live in rural areas, but even then will it be affordable to them.

I live on the Central Coast and I can't get ADSL2… It's been suggested that rural areas will be subsidised

 

[citizen_cub]

I don't see how the NBN is going to benefit those who are connected by satellite and who are already satisfied with their internet situation. i.e.myself. My internet situation is pretty good at the moment and I don't want to pay excess money just to have an optic fibre cable installed in my house. It may benefit does those who live in rural areas, but even then will it be affordable to them.

I live on the Central Coast and I can't get ADSL2… It's been suggested that rural areas will be subsidised

Fair enough (in your case) and in rural areas, but it simply won't be affordable for us Sydney Siders and most are connected to satellite or we have wireless anyway, having fast broadband isn't a necessity for the cities, but fair enough in your case, I also think ADSL2 isn't accessible in Woolongong either.

 

[AndTheKungFoSing]

Sydney Siders and most are connected to satellite or we have wireless anyway

Are you sure this is correct? I'd like to see something supporting this because my experiences with Sat connects has always been poor…. I also don't think the MAJORITY of people in Sydney are using a Sat connection....

 

[citizen_cub]

Sydney Siders and most are connected to satellite or we have wireless anyway

Are you sure this is correct? I'd like to see something supporting this because my experiences with Sat connects has always been poor…. I also don't think the MAJORITY of people in Sydney are using a Sat connection....

Also forgot to mention ADSL2\. I currently have satellite and it's terrific, fine for me. Also you haven't taken into account how inconvenient this is for business people who like taking their laptops around, why should they have to pay for optic fibre cable when they really want to use wireless? Personally, I as a Sydney Sider, DON'T want an optic fibre cable when I'm already satisfied with my broadband speed, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't!

 

[AndTheKungFoSing]

How does your GPS work in the CBD?

Do you still think Sat are the way to go in these areas? Also, hows the speeds on your sat connection? Does it allow for future growth and higher bandwidths for when TV's signals are streamed over the internet for example?

http://www.speedtest.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Let me know your results… pretty interested actually...

Oh... and because you have a sat connection hardly means the rest of Sydney do. I would actually place large amounts of money on the fact this is untrue.

Concerning Laptops.... you can still connect wirelessly to an access point which is connected to the NBN.... London are about to trial this and make the entire city wireless.... (however the internet will still be connected to an ULTRA fast FIBRE OPTIC connection....)

Wireless connections to routers is NOT the same as wireless connections to a Sat.... it uses COMPLETELY different technology.

You logic is flawed and selfish.

Because you don't want it... no one should gain advantage from it? I am not surprised of this train of thought though... given your political leanings.

Ohh and ADSL2+ can handle HD streaming, however because of population growth and limitations in the network... your speeds are slowed right down and unless you live a km from an exchange... unlucky.... The Liberal party solution is all crap! It's hardly even a band-aid solution.

One Country... One people.... think about everyone and not yourself. You selfish thinking is the exact reason why this great country has been held back for soooo long.