Remove this Banner Ad

National Broadband Network

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dry Rot
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Lester Burnham said:
Neither is particularly an investment. The Libs have been out of office for a while and feel the need to respond to Labor bullshit to get the Gen Y "other people pay" vote.

I'm still waiting for your reply to my post that internet penetration is beneficial for a country but there's no evidence that faster broadband is a worthwhile investment.
Click to expand...
Where do you think the world is going in the next 20 years?
 
Lester Burnham said:
Neither is particularly an investment. The Libs have been out of office for a while and feel the need to respond to Labor bullshit to get the Gen Y "other people pay" vote.

I'm still waiting for your reply to my post that internet penetration is beneficial for a country but there's no evidence that faster broadband is a worthwhile investment.
Click to expand...

Do you put effort into being a stereotype or does it come naturally to you?
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

TheMase said:
Huh? It is completely replacing our existing communications infrastructure! With far better, adaptable technology. That is an investment.

Since everyone will benefit it is worthwhile government project.
Click to expand...

You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the term investment. It is money expended for a benefit greater than that spent. 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?

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.


TheMase said:
There are a lot of benefits there, and I don't remember your post. Go and look at abs statistics for data growth, it is staggering.
Click to expand...

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 pr0n?

TheMase said:
As for those Gen Ys, well they will be on this planet paying for it longer than you
Click to expand...

I have no problem with people who require super fast internet paying for it. What is your objection to user pays?
 
How could anyone think that copper cable is a better solution than fibre?
 
clogged said:
Where do you think the world is going in the next 20 years?
Click to expand...

about the same spot but we would have done 20 laps around the sun during that period
 
Lester Burnham said:
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?
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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 pr0n?
Click to expand...
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?
Click to expand...
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)?
Click to expand...
 
The first big policy in democracy (Greece) was limiting the price whores could charge for sex and making the girls stand naked to ensure there was no misunderstanding of what you were buying. The NBN is similar in the sense it is a vote winner.

The NBN may end up being brilliant, a white elephant or anything in between. It would seem most punters here want it at any cost. So the government should just give it to them.

As long as the users pay the infrastructure costs and ongoing maintenance back within 10 years who cares. That said, those that want it should pay for it whether they end up using it or not.

Oh, true story re tho whores
 
Power Raid said:
The first big policy in democracy (Greece) was limiting the price whores could charge for sex and making the girls stand naked to ensure there was no misunderstanding of what you were buying. The NBN is similar in the sense it is a vote winner.

The NBN may end up being brilliant, a white elephant or anything in between. It would seem most punters here want it at any cost. So the government should just give it to them.

As long as the users pay the infrastructure costs and ongoing maintenance back within 10 years who cares. That said, those that want it should pay for it whether they end up using it or not.

Oh, true story re tho whores
Click to expand...


I still dont see why the coalition need to rip the damn thing up, it's not like they're not going to get into power based on their FTTN appealing to more people than FTTH.

It's not like they have a wealthy benefactor that would commercially benefit by it's watering down. An honorable christian man like Tony wouldn't do that.
 
Docker Clint said:
I still dont see why the coalition need to rip the damn thing up, it's not like they're not going to get into power based on their FTTN appealing to more people than FTTH.

It's not like they have a wealthy benefactor that would commercially benefit by it's watering down. An honorable christian man like Tony wouldn't do that.
Click to expand...

I am actually serious in my jest.

If the masses want it, build it!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Power Raid said:
The first big policy in democracy (Greece) was limiting the price whores could charge for sex and making the girls stand naked to ensure there was no misunderstanding of what you were buying. The NBN is similar in the sense it is a vote winner.

The NBN may end up being brilliant, a white elephant or anything in between. It would seem most punters here want it at any cost. So the government should just give it to them.

As long as the users pay the infrastructure costs and ongoing maintenance back within 10 years who cares. That said, those that want it should pay for it whether they end up using it or not.

Oh, true story re tho whores
Click to expand...


The point is the libs didnt even have the vision to see it. You can only go so long without vision
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

medusala said:
Exactly. Massive white elephant.
Click to expand...
Don't believe I said that. Government investment does not require the same return as a shareholder run company business. It does not need to make big returns as it does not have to pay shareholders. The system pays itself off over time via the users (including business).

Don't see how it will be a white elephant. Will be the backbone of Australia's communication needs for at least half a century.
 
TheMase said:
Don't believe I said that. Government investment does not require the same return as a shareholder run company business.
Click to expand...

Government does not need to make ANY return, it rarely does on commercial ventures.

The system pays itself off over time via the users (including business).
Click to expand...

Yes and the mining tax will raise tens of billions and the budget is in surplus.

Do you really think it will come in on time and on budget?
 
TheMase said:
Even so, I would pay $100b and may extend that if required
Click to expand...

How about 120 billion? 150? You have not even demonstrated the value if the cost were the original $44b.

TheMase said:
User does pay! They pay via their RSP.
Click to expand...


When the cost blows out, which it inevitably will, the government would be faced with a choice of passing on the costs to consumers via RSPs or absorbing it into government debt. Both options stink. Given that Labor has created a government monopoly for fibre, and handicapped 4G competition they would be at liberty to slug all consumers with big price rises irrespective of whether they require super fast broadband.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom