Chat Forum
It is currently Thu Nov 21, 2019 8:19 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23900 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 598  Next

Whos Going to Lead the Labor Rabble
Albo 44%  44%  [ 4 ]
Plibbers 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Bowen 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Chalmers 33%  33%  [ 3 ]
Uncle Tony 11%  11%  [ 1 ]
Clive Palmer 11%  11%  [ 1 ]
George Smith 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 9
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 2:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11479
Location: STRAYA CUNT
Who says you should believe him? I met a girl the other night who is one of his media advisors. I told her she was doing a terrible job, she said, and I quote, 'he's an absolute plum who won't listen to us.' It's not really anything to do with Rudd, it's that the alternative is so bad it's not really worth contemplating.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 3:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8696
Location: Kepler 452-b
Ali's Choice wrote:
Rudd started slowly, but ended this show well. Loved him pwning that religious nutjob, which for me was the highlight of the show.]



+ 1.....brilliant moment.

The rest of it was a bit meh. KRudd was schooled himself on the fake costings claims


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 10:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3140
Location: Queensland!
karahi wrote:
Vuaka wrote:
Labor might have the "faceless" men but the Liberals have the "invisible" men (and women).

Apparently for the past two weeks, the Liberals candidates in Western Sydney have refused to engage in debates or be interviewed by the media. Not sure if this extends to News Ltd as they would be painted in the best light regardless.

Where in the world is Jaymes Diaz? Claims to be a lawyer but doesn't have a current practising certificate.

I can't believe this numb nut is going to be a parliamentarian. I guess the people of Greenway will get what they deserve.


It's pretty rare for any bog standard prospective parliamentary candidate from any party to engage in debates, isn't it? Indeed, that would usually be forbidden by the central party administration I’d think – too much risk of them going off-piste and leading to negative headlines. I’ve only ever seen the leaders engage in debates, and even then only after careful preparation.

I’m not sure exactly what instances you have seen of them refusing to engage in debates, or what form any proposed debate was meant to take. It does strike me that it wouldn’t be a bad tactic for Labor candidates to challenge their Coalition counterparts to debates, safe in the knowledge that there is not a hope in hell of the offer being accepted. They can then accuse their opponents of refusing to debate the issues from a position of total safety. But if the boot were on the other foot, exactly the same thing would probably happen.

Terminology as laid down in the Legal Profession Acts of the various states:

"Australian Lawyer" = anyone who has passed all their exams/done their articles and been admitted as a lawyer by the Supreme Court of their state.

"Australian Legal Practitioner" = an Australian Lawyer who has a current practising certificate, which you'd only bother to get if you intended to practise as a lawyer and were currently employed as such or working in partnership. There are plenty of Australian Lawyers who don't have practising certificates if they've decided to do something else with their lives.


Are you in NSW? Diaz is a practising Law of some description ergo he must have the certificate you mention if he is a Solicitor otherwise if he is a Lawyer he needs admittance to the NSW Bar. I assume he has one or the other as he is not a corporate legal brief or other.

Is your contention that someone who stands for Party election doesn't need to know his Party's major election planks? And people are wondering about the level of Pollie we are getting at the moment :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 11:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16596
Location: Adelaide via Sydney and Patea
Sluggy wrote:
Just watching K. Rudd on Lateline.

Interested that when he was asked what the alleged $80 billion in alleged LNP cuts was, he ducked, weaved and ran away.

He then moved on to the assertion that there is nothing wrong with the Oz economy.

TJ asked him "Why is it then that people feel are they under stress... "

He blamed the global economy.

Can Snapper or Waratah explain to me why I should believe this prick?


Abbott will be worse.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 11:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31944
Location: in transit
Taranaki Snapper wrote:
Sluggy wrote:
Just watching K. Rudd on Lateline.

Interested that when he was asked what the alleged $80 billion in alleged LNP cuts was, he ducked, weaved and ran away.

He then moved on to the assertion that there is nothing wrong with the Oz economy.

TJ asked him "Why is it then that people feel are they under stress... "

He blamed the global economy.

Can Snapper or Waratah explain to me why I should believe this prick?


Abbott will be worse.



Vote for policy over personality, then.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 11:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16596
Location: Adelaide via Sydney and Patea
guy smiley wrote:
Taranaki Snapper wrote:
Sluggy wrote:
Just watching K. Rudd on Lateline.

Interested that when he was asked what the alleged $80 billion in alleged LNP cuts was, he ducked, weaved and ran away.

He then moved on to the assertion that there is nothing wrong with the Oz economy.

TJ asked him "Why is it then that people feel are they under stress... "

He blamed the global economy.

Can Snapper or Waratah explain to me why I should believe this prick?


Abbott will be worse.


Vote for policy over personality, then.


I do!


Last edited by Taranaki Snapper on Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 11:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5769
Ali's Choice wrote:
Vuaka wrote:
I thought it was pretty funny. You could see the anger welling within the pastor when put on the spot about homosexuality, choking on his words.... and ended with the audience laughing at him. :lol:


Yeah made me laugh too. You could actually see the pastor's anger turn to hate, and then humiliation once he realised he was being publicly shamed.


But isn't that preaching to the converted a bit? It is an easy thing to smack, but in this election, how many votes will the stance actually move to the Labor Party?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 12:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16332
Location: Perth
How Rudd sees himself?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSXJzybEeJM


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 12:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24840
Location: Queensland
_fatprop wrote:
Ali's Choice wrote:
Vuaka wrote:
I thought it was pretty funny. You could see the anger welling within the pastor when put on the spot about homosexuality, choking on his words.... and ended with the audience laughing at him. :lol:


Yeah made me laugh too. You could actually see the pastor's anger turn to hate, and then humiliation once he realised he was being publicly shamed.


But isn't that preaching to the converted a bit? It is an easy thing to smack, but in this election, how many votes will the stance actually move to the Labor Party?


You could say the same thing about just about everything both Rudd and Abbott have said and done throughout this campaign. It was a funny moment, nothing more, nothing less.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 12:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5769
Ali's Choice wrote:
_fatprop wrote:
Ali's Choice wrote:
Vuaka wrote:
I thought it was pretty funny. You could see the anger welling within the pastor when put on the spot about homosexuality, choking on his words.... and ended with the audience laughing at him. :lol:


Yeah made me laugh too. You could actually see the pastor's anger turn to hate, and then humiliation once he realised he was being publicly shamed.


But isn't that preaching to the converted a bit? It is an easy thing to smack, but in this election, how many votes will the stance actually move to the Labor Party?


You could say the same thing about just about everything both Rudd and Abbott have said and done throughout this campaign. It was a funny moment, nothing more, nothing less.


Absolutely, everything is contrived to grab and keep those votes from the centre, I just don't see how this "funny moment" creates or adds momentum to Rudd's side from the centre.

It won't lose him votes, but that ain't Rudd's current problem is it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 12:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24840
Location: Queensland
_fatprop wrote:
Absolutely, everything is contrived to grab and keep those votes from the centre, I just don't see how this "funny moment" creates or adds momentum to Rudd's side from the centre.

It won't lose him votes, but that ain't Rudd's current problem is it?


Who said it would gain him votes? Can't you just take a light hearted moment for what it was? You strike me as someone who leads a rather joyless life, defined by whingeing and complaining about others. A real 'glass half empty' kind of guy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 12:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16332
Location: Perth
This is a really good article imo.



Why won't the politicians trust us with the truth? Across Australia, it's the biggest complaint about the election campaign in particular and politics in general.
The answer is very simple. No, it's not because they're congenital liars. It's not because they're idiots. It's because of John Hewson. More exactly, it's what he offered us, and what Australia did to him in return.

In 1991, Hewson told us the truth. The then leader of the opposition issued a detailed, 650-page manifesto of his entire plan for government. It was issued two years before an election was due.

It was bold, comprehensive, bracingly honest. It was fatal.
The Fightback! manifesto has gone down in political folklore as "the longest suicide note in political history". Hewson lost the 1993 election, which had been supposedly "unlosable." Labor won another three-year term.
"That was a pretty scarring experience for politicians," Hewson agrees today. And for future politicians, including Hewson's then press secretary, Tony Abbott.
The Hewson plan was a blueprint for a surge in national competitiveness. It would promote growth in the private sector at the expense of the public sector.
But the political debate centred on the tax equation. Hewson offered to cut income taxes by a third, funded by the introduction of a GST set at a rate of 15 per cent.
Hewson's boldness was initially a political advantage. When the then prime minister, Bob Hawke, seemed unable to confront Fightback!, his party replaced him with Paul Keating.
The new prime minister waged a ferocious two-year scare campaign against it. Keating's alternative? He told Australia that it could have the benefit without any cost. He promised to match the tax cuts but without the nasty GST to pay for them.
And in case you didn't believe this magic pudding promise, Keating legislated the tax cuts, pledging them as "L-A-W." Of course, it was nonsense. After the election, Keating rescinded the tax cuts because they were unaffordable.
What did this episode tell us about the Australian people? "They were easily frightened, easily misled, easily lied to," Hewson says.
Australia ended up getting the essential Hewson tax bargain - lower personal taxes funded by a new GST - courtesy of John Howard and Peter Costello a few years later.
Keating told his so-called "true believers" that it was "the sweetest victory of all" as Labor won another term. But the main consequence of that election 20 years ago was that the voters had established a powerful new incentive for political leaders.
We had shown the political parties, as clearly as possible, that we were not interested in the truth. "Don't tell us your real plans. We prefer political fairy tales. Tell us that story again, the one where we get lots of goodies at no cost."
This is precisely what Tony Abbott and Kevin Rudd are telling us today. Fairy tales.
We get frustrated because we know they're not levelling with us. But don't blame Abbott and Rudd. They are rational actors in pursuit of reward. They are merely responding to the incentive that the Australian people set up.
Tony Abbott will not trust the people with his full costings until the dying days of the campaign because he learnt from Hewson's experience that it would expose him to the risk of a scare campaign.
And Kevin Rudd is waging a scare campaign on Tony Abbott's alleged plan to raise the GST and cut spending because he learnt from Keating's GST scare campaign against Hewson that the people can be easily frightened.
Hewson believes that the political parties have become ever less truthful with the people since: "It's just gone downhill over the last 20 years. There's less and less substance, it's less and less believable."
Yet he thinks the people have drawn a very different lesson: "I think the electorate has moved on and the politicians haven't."
This is something you wouldn't expect to hear from modern politics' greatest victim of public gullibility, but Hewson says: "I think the electorate can be trusted. The electorate may have a simple understanding in some case, but people know right from wrong, good from bad, truth from lies. They know when they're being bullshitted.
"People are craving information and … being treated like dummies. I think the people are much more sophisticated than the politicians."
Hewson doesn't advise today's leaders to produce another Fightback!-style manifesto, but he does think a smart politician today would offer the people a good deal more than Labor or Liberal has on the table:
"You probably don't need to go as far as I did with thousands of pages of detail, but give them a deliverable vision, explain how you'll get there, take the people into your confidence."
But neither Rudd nor Abbott has. And this means that "whoever wins will face a massive problem" because "none of their big promises is funded." Hewson runs through a list - the national disability scheme is not properly funded beyond its earliest years, and neither is the so-called Gonski schools funding, nor the parties' promised infrastructure spending.
The last leader to truly trust the people with the truth concludes: "Whoever wins will have to trim their programs and delay them, and the electorate will get even more jaundiced than they already are."


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/fearful-l ... z2dmX35v7j


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 12:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16533
Location: STRAYA PLUM
Sluggy wrote:
Just watching K. Rudd on Lateline.

Interested that when he was asked what the alleged $80 billion in alleged LNP cuts was, he ducked, weaved and ran away.

He then moved on to the assertion that there is nothing wrong with the Oz economy.

TJ asked him "Why is it then that people feel are they under stress... "

He blamed the global economy.

Can Snapper or Waratah explain to me why I should believe this prick?


From the sounds of things Kevin Rudd isnt a nice person.

There is nothing wrong with the Australian economy.

People are not under any more stress than they have been in the past. In fact, they are under less stress.

The global economy is not overly strong, but there is a rebound happening in the US and the data out of Asia is encouraging.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 12:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5769
Ali's Choice wrote:
_fatprop wrote:
Absolutely, everything is contrived to grab and keep those votes from the centre, I just don't see how this "funny moment" creates or adds momentum to Rudd's side from the centre.

It won't lose him votes, but that ain't Rudd's current problem is it?


Who said it would gain him votes? Can't you just take a light hearted moment for what it was? You strike me as someone who leads a rather joyless life, defined by whingeing and complaining about others. A real 'glass half empty' kind of guy.


:lol: you give me joy Ali, you are getting more whiny by the day, the next 6 years should be quite challenging for you.

This is an election thread and I was looking at the comment in the context of the election, I appreciate that may be a radical approach, but hey.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 12:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1348
Location: Bondi Centrelink
Vuaka wrote:
Labor might have the "faceless" men but the Liberals have the "invisible" men (and women).

Apparently for the past two weeks, the Liberals candidates in Western Sydney have refused to engage in debates or be interviewed by the media. Not sure if this extends to News Ltd as they would be painted in the best light regardless.

Where in the world is Jaymes Diaz? Claims to be a lawyer but doesn't have a current practising certificate.

I can't believe this numb nut is going to be a parliamentarian. I guess the people of Greenway will get what they deserve.


Did you see the other Westie Liberal Fiona Scott on 4 Corners last night? It's no wonder they're hiding these muppets, every time they open their mouths you cringe at the state of Australian politics. She blamed traffic congestion on the M4 on ....... wait for it...... asylum seekers! Apparently the 50k on asylum seekers that arrived on boats last year all travel on the M4 at once.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 12:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1348
Location: Bondi Centrelink
Given the Liberals have put a muzzle on the leader of the party (baddies vs baddies, goodies vs baddies), there is no way they’re going to let the Pauline Hanson wannabes talk to the media or public..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 12:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16332
Location: Perth
that 'baddies v baddies' comment was probably the most accurate thing either leader has said during the campaign.

Abbott actually schooled Rudd on his own turf imo and hinted at a chance of a new foreign policy strategy.


Some people will look for fault in anything and look for praise in anything... depending on who's talking. Most of those on this thread are like this. :?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1348
Location: Bondi Centrelink
Sex appeal? x(

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16332
Location: Perth
Dubya Howard wrote:
Sex appeal? x(

Image



she doesn't really do it for me....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5769
Dubya Howard wrote:
Vuaka wrote:
Labor might have the "faceless" men but the Liberals have the "invisible" men (and women).

Apparently for the past two weeks, the Liberals candidates in Western Sydney have refused to engage in debates or be interviewed by the media. Not sure if this extends to News Ltd as they would be painted in the best light regardless.

Where in the world is Jaymes Diaz? Claims to be a lawyer but doesn't have a current practising certificate.

I can't believe this numb nut is going to be a parliamentarian. I guess the people of Greenway will get what they deserve.


Did you see the other Westie Liberal Fiona Scott on 4 Corners last night? It's no wonder they're hiding these muppets, every time they open their mouths you cringe at the state of Australian politics. She blamed traffic congestion on the M4 on ....... wait for it...... asylum seekers! Apparently the 50k on asylum seekers that arrived on boats last year all travel on the M4 at once.


she does appear to be a one term representative, like a few of the other rabble


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4465
Dumbledore wrote:
Who says you should believe him? I met a girl the other night who is one of his media advisors. I told her she was doing a terrible job, she said, and I quote, 'he's an absolute plum who won't listen to us.' It's not really anything to do with Rudd, it's that the alternative is so bad it's not really worth contemplating.


Let me guess, she's Gen Y?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4465
inshane wrote:
kiap wrote:
The FTTH NBN is still the popular option as I see it. Not sure too many punters actually want Malcolm's 2nd rate plan. Best scenario is the Libs do a backflip: "Too far into the process to cancel". But who knows...


That's how I saw it too.

Disclosure statement - I've worked in telecoms and data then convergent networking for over 25 years. I'm gagging for FTTH and have every technical and personal reason to prefer it.

But my kids - early to mid 20's professionals wedded to the internet and their laptops for work an play and they think that I'm "out of date"

NONE of them have so much as a telephone line in their homes. All of them have wireless networking and telephones and don't want an old fashioned cable (fibre) tying them to one spot. And almost none of their friends want fibre either.

Maybe the optimum is a hybrid scheme with fibre used to flood suburbs with high speed wireless internet and FTTP for businesses, government and those old enough to like permanence. I know my kids would like that. OTOH the tree huggers would get all kumbaya about the extra "radio-activity"

Insane


You obviously were in Sales and not Tech.

They might want Wireless in the house and out and about but where does the signal for the wireless come from? :blush:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 2:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3576
Location: Born from an Egg on a Mountain Top
towny wrote:
Dubya Howard wrote:
Sex appeal? x(

Image



she doesn't really do it for me....


Looks like a tranny.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24840
Location: Queensland
So Tony Abbott has finally come out yesterday and admitted what any educated person has known for years. That his Direct Action policy is a sham, and nothing more than a tactical ploy to counter the ALP labeling him a climate change denier. He has now admitted, with the election won, that his deeply flawed policy probably won't deliver the cuts to target emissions that he boasted it would. But regardless of the cuts to emissions it delivers he will cap spending. I have been saying for years that this was a cynical, political policy rather than an environmental one, but the media have deliberately chosen to ignore Abbott's sham policy. Perhaps because 70% of the print media is owned by climate change denier Rupert Murdoch, and much of the rest is almost all owned by mining magnate and anti-ETS campaigner Gina Reinhart.

What a joke!
Quote:
Mr Abbott confirmed categorically on Monday that he would break the Coalition's pledge on greenhouse reduction targets if it cost more money than he had budgeted for.
''We've told you the money we'd spend and we won't spend any more,'' the Opposition Leader said.
Under Mr Abbott's Direct Action plan, farmers and industry will be paid to take action to reduce their emissions. The Coalition has budgeted $3.2 billion over the next four years to do this, plant trees, install more rooftop solar systems and take other measures.
Several attempts to model the outcome of direct action has found it will not deliver the promised 5 per cent cut with the money budgeted. According to independent modelling, the Coalition's policy will likely fall somewhere between $4 billion and $20 billion short of reaching the emissions reduction target.
Mr Abbott does not accept the modelling and says he is ''confident'' the Coalition can reach the 5 per cent reduction target with the money already allocated.


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politi ... z2dn8ArqmD


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9505
Location: Gangly Beehive
Mat the Expat wrote:
inshane wrote:
kiap wrote:
The FTTH NBN is still the popular option as I see it. Not sure too many punters actually want Malcolm's 2nd rate plan. Best scenario is the Libs do a backflip: "Too far into the process to cancel". But who knows...


That's how I saw it too.

Disclosure statement - I've worked in telecoms and data then convergent networking for over 25 years. I'm gagging for FTTH and have every technical and personal reason to prefer it.

But my kids - early to mid 20's professionals wedded to the internet and their laptops for work an play and they think that I'm "out of date"

NONE of them have so much as a telephone line in their homes. All of them have wireless networking and telephones and don't want an old fashioned cable (fibre) tying them to one spot. And almost none of their friends want fibre either.

Maybe the optimum is a hybrid scheme with fibre used to flood suburbs with high speed wireless internet and FTTP for businesses, government and those old enough to like permanence. I know my kids would like that. OTOH the tree huggers would get all kumbaya about the extra "radio-activity"

Insane


You obviously were in Sales and not Tech.

They might want Wireless in the house and out and about but where does the signal for the wireless come from? :blush:


It might become possible in the future to "flood suburbs with high speed wireless internet" but we'd need technology that hasn't been invented yet, and might never be. The kids will just have to put up with uncool fiber for now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11479
Location: STRAYA CUNT
I don't know anyone who wants Tony/Mewcom's ridiculous NBN scheme. People seem to be desperately hoping the NBN gets to them before the Coalition have the chance to gut the program.

Got a Sex Party flyer in the mail just then. They actually have a lot of genuinely common-sense ideas. Obviously it's easy to say tax and regulate weed if you're a minority party, but if they were to rebrand I can see them getting a seat or two in the near future.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1348
Location: Bondi Centrelink
Of course Tony is a climate denier. It's god will that the planet is warming up, nothing to do with humans.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9505
Location: Gangly Beehive
I was reading about how Malcolm "brought the Internet to Australia". What he actually did was invest $500k in Ozemail in 1994 for $500,000 and sell it to Worldcom for $57 million in 1999. Jammy bastard.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9505
Location: Gangly Beehive
Dumbledore wrote:
I don't know anyone who wants Tony/Mewcom's ridiculous NBN scheme. People seem to be desperately hoping the NBN gets to them before the Coalition have the chance to gut the program.

Got a Sex Party flyer in the mail just then. They actually have a lot of genuinely common-sense ideas. Obviously it's easy to say tax and regulate weed if you're a minority party, but if they were to rebrand I can see them getting a seat or two in the near future.


There are few micro-parties with common-sense ideas. I expect that's because their policies are invented by people who mainly want to find solutions to problems.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5769
6roucho wrote:
Dumbledore wrote:
I don't know anyone who wants Tony/Mewcom's ridiculous NBN scheme. People seem to be desperately hoping the NBN gets to them before the Coalition have the chance to gut the program.

Got a Sex Party flyer in the mail just then. They actually have a lot of genuinely common-sense ideas. Obviously it's easy to say tax and regulate weed if you're a minority party, but if they were to rebrand I can see them getting a seat or two in the near future.


There are few micro-parties with common-sense ideas. I expect that's because their policies are invented by people who mainly want to find solutions to problems.


The Sex Party is rather libertarian (no wonder agree with a lot of the proposals)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9505
Location: Gangly Beehive
_fatprop wrote:
6roucho wrote:
Dumbledore wrote:
I don't know anyone who wants Tony/Mewcom's ridiculous NBN scheme. People seem to be desperately hoping the NBN gets to them before the Coalition have the chance to gut the program.

Got a Sex Party flyer in the mail just then. They actually have a lot of genuinely common-sense ideas. Obviously it's easy to say tax and regulate weed if you're a minority party, but if they were to rebrand I can see them getting a seat or two in the near future.


There are few micro-parties with common-sense ideas. I expect that's because their policies are invented by people who mainly want to find solutions to problems.


The Sex Party is rather libertarian (no wonder agree with a lot of the proposals)


What I meant to say was "There are a few micro-parties with common-sense ideas." Somehow I ended up saying the opposite of what I meant, but you got it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4465
6roucho wrote:
Mat the Expat wrote:
inshane wrote:
kiap wrote:
The FTTH NBN is still the popular option as I see it. Not sure too many punters actually want Malcolm's 2nd rate plan. Best scenario is the Libs do a backflip: "Too far into the process to cancel". But who knows...


That's how I saw it too.

Disclosure statement - I've worked in telecoms and data then convergent networking for over 25 years. I'm gagging for FTTH and have every technical and personal reason to prefer it.

But my kids - early to mid 20's professionals wedded to the internet and their laptops for work an play and they think that I'm "out of date"

NONE of them have so much as a telephone line in their homes. All of them have wireless networking and telephones and don't want an old fashioned cable (fibre) tying them to one spot. And almost none of their friends want fibre either.

Maybe the optimum is a hybrid scheme with fibre used to flood suburbs with high speed wireless internet and FTTP for businesses, government and those old enough to like permanence. I know my kids would like that. OTOH the tree huggers would get all kumbaya about the extra "radio-activity"

Insane


You obviously were in Sales and not Tech.

They might want Wireless in the house and out and about but where does the signal for the wireless come from? :blush:


It might become possible in the future to "flood suburbs with high speed wireless internet" but we'd need technology that hasn't been invented yet, and might never be. The kids will just have to put up with uncool fiber for now.


You would need multiple fibre backhauls for this so it's a moot point.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 4:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 146
Location: Straya, cnuts!
Mat the Expat wrote:
inshane wrote:
kiap wrote:
The FTTH NBN is still the popular option as I see it. Not sure too many punters actually want Malcolm's 2nd rate plan. Best scenario is the Libs do a backflip: "Too far into the process to cancel". But who knows...


(snip for brevity)

Maybe the optimum is a hybrid scheme with fibre used to flood suburbs with high speed wireless internet and FTTP for businesses, government and those old enough to like permanence. I know my kids would like that. OTOH the tree huggers would get all kumbaya about the extra "radio-activity"

Insane


You obviously were in Sales and not Tech.

They might want Wireless in the house and out and about but where does the signal for the wireless come from? :blush:


By your logic, you must be management which will explain you being somewhat hard of understanding.

No, I'm an engineer, and have spent all those years specifying, designing and implementing networks, voice, data, video and now converged.

Hybrid - fibre to base station, and fibre to selected premises, with fibre to the node for everywhere else (back of Bourke excepted).

You might profitably re-read my original post and leave the knee jerk reaction alone. Note that *I* want FTTH myself, but that (aside from a few colleagues of my own propellor head dispensation) I find it very hard to find a young person who wants it. I also can't tell them what new unforseen application will make them willing to be tied back down.

insane


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 4:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4465
inshane wrote:
Mat the Expat wrote:
inshane wrote:
kiap wrote:
The FTTH NBN is still the popular option as I see it. Not sure too many punters actually want Malcolm's 2nd rate plan. Best scenario is the Libs do a backflip: "Too far into the process to cancel". But who knows...


(snip for brevity)

Maybe the optimum is a hybrid scheme with fibre used to flood suburbs with high speed wireless internet and FTTP for businesses, government and those old enough to like permanence. I know my kids would like that. OTOH the tree huggers would get all kumbaya about the extra "radio-activity"

Insane


You obviously were in Sales and not Tech.

They might want Wireless in the house and out and about but where does the signal for the wireless come from? :blush:


By your logic, you must be management which will explain you being somewhat hard of understanding.

No, I'm an engineer, and have spent all those years specifying, designing and implementing networks, voice, data, video and now converged.

Hybrid - fibre to base station, and fibre to selected premises, with fibre to the node for everywhere else (back of Bourke excepted).

You might profitably re-read my original post and leave the knee jerk reaction alone. Note that *I* want FTTH myself, but that (aside from a few colleagues of my own propellor head dispensation) I find it very hard to find a young person who wants it. I also can't tell them what new unforseen application will make them willing to be tied back down.

insane


Don't call me a Manager Cnut! :lol:

If you do design, you'd know the reasons I mentioned that fully immersive WiFi is impossible without Backhaul, which is what I said. :nod:

Due to the Lib's butchering of the Telstra float, we're still dealing with vast areas of Major cities that are designate "Business Parks" that can't get fibre into them.

This will be Telstra Mk II by the Libs

:(


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 4:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 146
Location: Straya, cnuts!
[quote="6roucho] It might become possible in the future to "flood suburbs with high speed wireless internet" but we'd need technology that hasn't been invented yet, and might never be. The kids will just have to put up with uncool fiber for now.[/quote]

The kids aren't using it *already*. That's the point.

And at this stage "flooding" is equal to a higher penetration of 4G, though two of my kids remain happy enough with 3G speeds.

Still, I reckon that I won't live long enough for FTTH to pass my house. Be a bit tough on the youngsters paying for it though.

insane


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 4:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 146
Location: Straya, cnuts!
Mat the Expat wrote:
Don't call me a Manager Cnut! :lol:

If you do design, you'd know the reasons I mentioned that fully immersive WiFi is impossible without Backhaul, which is what I said. :nod:

Due to the Lib's butchering of the Telstra float, we're still dealing with vast areas of Major cities that are designate "Business Parks" that can't get fibre into them.

This will be Telstra Mk II by the Libs

:(


Jesus, you asked for it. Imagine accusing me of being in sales. Those are the blokes who tell the customer that "of course he can do it" then come back and tell me taht I'd better be able to do it!

Not really talking about WiFi at this point, and not looking forward to handing off between WiFi and faster wireless internet than 4G using 802.21

I'm only looking at the reality of what a whole tranche of the population are currently willing to buy to fit with their own lifestyle. And thinking aloud that all that fibre had better provide a very *flexible* structure because I'm not too sure there's not dust on our crystal balls. We may (balls, we WILL) undoubtedly find ourselves using it for things and in ways we don't presently imagine. And that change may be earlier than we expect.

insane (wondering about the take-up rates already)

(edit:typos)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 4:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16332
Location: Perth
I voted for the NBN when it was going to cost $40B.

What is it going to cost now if the ALP win? What's the latest guess?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 4:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18427
Mat the Expat wrote:
Don't call me a Manager Cnut! :lol:

Was waiting for your reply on that! :lol:

inshane wrote:
*I* want FTTH myself, but that (aside from a few colleagues of my own propellor head dispensation) I find it very hard to find a young person who wants it. I also can't tell them what new unforseen application will make them willing to be tied back down.

I don't know many 20-somethings but the ones I do support FTTP (saying that, they're mostly tech geeks).

We need good capacity on both fixed and wireless. I can see a future growth explosion of high-density micro base stations, though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 4:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9505
Location: Gangly Beehive
inshane wrote:
The kids aren't using it *already*. That's the point.

And at this stage "flooding" is equal to a higher penetration of 4G, though two of my kids remain happy enough with 3G speeds.

Still, I reckon that I won't live long enough for FTTH to pass my house. Be a bit tough on the youngsters paying for it though.

insane


The problem with that idea is the inescapable bandwidth limitation of wireless networks. Hartley's law tells us that the maximum data rate of a communications links is proportional to its bandwidth in hertz. As more people use a system like 4G then the bandwidth available to each user is reduced. Anyone who suffered from the over-subscription of 3's 3g network will tell you about speeds in the dial-up range, e.g. 56kbps. If we tried to use the 4G networks to deliver community broadband then the same thing would happen. The only way to deliver fast broadband to large numbers of people is by building a fiber network.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 4:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16533
Location: STRAYA PLUM
For those of us who are normal, can someone please explain what we are talking about.
Maybe complete the following sentence that I can use with authority:

"My mate works in IT and he reckons that the coalition broadband plan is ... and the ALP one is ..."


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23900 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 598  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], BokJock, danthefan, DOB, Dryden, fatheralice, Floppykid, Google Adsense [Bot], jambanja, Jensrsa, Jim Lahey, Larry Murphy, Lazy Couch potato, message #2527204, Mr. Very Popular, New guy, OomPB, Saint, shereblue, terangi48, Ulsters Red Hand, Xin and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group