You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the term investment. It is money expended for a benefit greater than that spent.
in·vest·ment
/inˈves(t)mənt/
Noun
The action or process of investing money for profit or material result.
A thing that is worth buying because it may be profitable or useful in the future.
My ipad does not allow me to bold, but this definition clearly says material result, or useful and thus my understanding is just fine. Once again, the government does not need to make a profit. It is there to provide vital infrastructure, of which communications should be included.
At this point in time we don't know the amount Labor's NBN will cost and little evidence of the benefits. Feel free to answer Power Raid's question - how much is too much?
You don't know the cost of anything. You merely make a forecast based on known knowledge and potential challenges, especially in a project of this size. I can then say we don't know how much the coalition policy will cost, or their PPL, Labors. movement of Navy etc etc.
Most of the blowout in costs are from worst case scenarios that are generated by those who benefit from them most.
So it is crap for me to use likely evidence based on current trends, but you can use political crap from your favourite team as "evidence" it will totally blow out?
Even so, I would pay $100b and may extend that if required.
It is a nonsense that 'everyone will benefit' from the NBN. There is some evidence that internet penetration is beneficial but none that super fast internet is worth the huge cost.
No, what is nonsense is you suggestion that everyone will benefit is nonsense. Name a person that doesn't use this technology on a regular basis and won't do in an ever increasing way into the future. Everytime you use an Internet related device in Australia you will be benefiting from the nbn. Try to avoid using a communications device, won't happen with almost anyone under 50 and will be rarer in the future.
It is infrastructure, and I am confident it will at least pay itself back within its lifetime making it a worthwhile (government) INVESTMENT.
It was my post where you said i would probably not read your link lol.
What do you think is driving the data growth? Do you think we should spend a significant part of GDP to cater for illegal movie and music downloads, and porn?
Outside of going into my Internet is in its infancy rant, does this even matter? People are willing to pay big money for entertainment. Hell, anything that is not work is entertainment. We work and invest to make more money to build a foundation were we can comfortably entertain ourselves. Fibre needs to be viewed the same as a road, electricity etc. It is the central hub of information that connects the whole planet. More services and functions will develop with the fibre over time. It is clear that the Internet will play a huge part in our lives in the future, and the only way Australia will get a network like this is if the governments does it (for the same reasons you claim it is not worth it because it doesn't 'make money'.
I have no problem with people who require super fast internet paying for it. What is your objection to user pays?
User does pay! They pay via their RSP. If the governments does it, they will get economies of scale and do it cheaper. It will cost significantly more for each user, including small business, which don't make it worth while because of the cost.
What is your view of the coalition plan and surely you see this is a better use of taxpayers money (please make the assumption it will go over budget significantly to remain consistent)?