Oz Federal Election 2013 - Discussion and Comments

[Moody]

Moody moody moody, I know that todays script calls for arguments about about state issues (like health) but you are drawing a reallly long bow with your NBN "agitprop", as others have pointed out - where is the cost benefit analysis? And furthermore are you saying that teleconferencing/videoconferencing in a small number of specialized medical cases does not happen in other countries at all? I think not. I think it already happens in other countries with existing technology that was rolled out by the private sector without inducing a budget destroying state monopoly.

"Today's script"???? What meaningless tripe are you making up now? I was responding to comments about the NBN with a personal anecdote. Now that someone has helpfully supplied some stats I can see that the true speed difference between Oz and the US is "only" 28%, and we have faster internet than New Zealand and most third-world countries. Everything OK then and we can go with the Coalitions' plan B.

Telemedicine will become increasingly important to help keep costs down, but I agree putting a figure on the number of lives it will save is nigh on impossible. It is one of the benefits you get from the government deciding "we will do this" rather than a company saying "show me the money". The latter approach works fine in the high-density, high-margin areas ..... not so good elsewhere.

All those "high speed" internet countries also have high population densities in very small geographic areas so are totally inapplicabe/irrelevant to Australia, with a huge area and low population density. Also note that some of the fastest internet speeds in the world have not saved these Euorpean economies from being in the doldrums at the moment, so there goes the "cargo cult" mentality about economic performance being greatly assisted by people sitting at home downloading episodes of Game of Thrones.

About the closest you will get to Australia is looking at Canada, and surprise, surprise, Canada has reasonably fast and cheap broadband rolled out by the private sector in stages with a mix of technologies from Satellite to wireless to FTTN before they start trials of FTTH. Pretty much what a lot of countries have done. Other countries have worked their way out of historical/competition issues and large network owner incumbents (i.e. Telstra) without instituting a brand new large inefficient tax-payer funded monopoly.....

We have a very urbanised population, yet our broadband is lagging woefully behind our counterparts. And what are you smoking if you think high-speed broadband should single-handedly fix economies hammered by the GFC.

I'm still not sure what you are trying to say with the Canada bit. They sit 11 places above us on the broadband "league table" and this is a reason to ditch NBN and keep doing what has obviously failed to deliver? Please explain ....

You can go back to making unfair assertions about people 457 Visas now if you want. But you are above that aren't you.

What unfair assumptions did I make about 457 visas?

 

[chrisb]

Part of the problem with the NBN is that no one knows what the future of the Internet holds. It hasn't been invented yet.

It'd be nice to be prepared when it happens. It WILL happen.

 

[eastwest101]

...Now that someone has helpfully supplied some stats I can see that the true speed difference between Oz and the US is "only" 28%, and we have faster internet than New Zealand and most third-world countries. Everything OK then and we can go with the Coalitions' plan B.

That was sort of the point that I was trying to make - its 28% slower than say the USA, so an episode of TV takes 1min to download in Aus as opposed to 40sec in the USA = not really a national emergency in my opinion.

...Telemedicine will become increasingly important to help keep costs down, but I agree putting a figure on the number of lives it will save is nigh on impossible. It is one of the benefits you get from the government deciding "we will do this" rather than a company saying "show me the money". The latter approach works fine in the high-density, high-margin areas ..... not so good elsewhere.

You are on a slippery slope with that argument - if its beneficial that the government just decides to "do this" then where do you draw the line? Telecomunications? What about banks? Airlines? Of course telcos would prefer to invest in higher-density and high margin areas, but there are other ways to acheive a fairer outcome than just building a monopoly, other countries have done it, its not like we are the only country in the world whom have to maintain and improve broadband capacity.

...We have a very urbanised population, yet our broadband is lagging woefully behind our counterparts. And what are you smoking if you think high-speed broadband should single-handedly fix economies hammered by the GFC.

I was making the point that some NBN advocates have a cargo cult mentality that the future of the world relies on having the fastest broadband in the world. Unfortunately the reality of economics, geography, government revenue limitations and a host of other things also come into play. I agree - we don't want the slowest/worst internet in the world obviously, but its no use sending ourselves broke to pay for the fastest internet in the world, and its economic benefits of average vs best would seem to be economically marginal.

...I'm still not sure what you are trying to say with the Canada bit. They sit 11 places above us on the broadband "league table" and this is a reason to ditch NBN and keep doing what has obviously failed to deliver? Please explain ....

Just explaining that Canadian internet speeds are a bit faster and costs are lower with similar geography and population, and they did it through the private sector without a government owned monopoly. Its an example that works. I agree with you though - there are historical reasons and roadblocks that partly explain why Australian investement in telecomunications have been mixed and sometimes unsuccesful, and all the failures have to do with government monopolies and politicians on both sides interfering with normal business practises resulting in market distortions.

...What unfair assumptions did I make about 457 visas?

Sorry - I thought the smile would imply the sarcasm - directed at some politicians and not yourself. No insult intended there. What is your opinion about the whole 457 Visa debate that is happening?

 

[TheEmu]

Moody moody moody, I know that todays script calls for arguments about about state issues (like health) but you are drawing a reallly long bow with your NBN "agitprop", as others have pointed out - where is the cost benefit analysis? And furthermore are you saying that teleconferencing/videoconferencing in a small number of specialized medical cases does not happen in other countries at all? I think not. I think it already happens in other countries with existing technology that was rolled out by the private sector without inducing a budget destroying state monopoly.

All those "high speed" internet countries also have high population densities in very small geographic areas so are totally inapplicabe/irrelevant to Australia, with a huge area and low population density. Also note that some of the fastest internet speeds in the world have not saved these Euorpean economies from being in the doldrums at the moment, so there goes the "cargo cult" mentality about economic performance being greatly assisted by people sitting at home downloading episodes of Game of Thrones.

About the closest you will get to Australia is looking at Canada, and surprise, surprise, Canada has reasonably fast and cheap broadband rolled out by the private sector in stages with a mix of technologies from Satellite to wireless to FTTN before they start trials of FTTH. Pretty much what a lot of countries have done. Other countries have worked their way out of historical/competition issues and large network owner incumbents (i.e. Telstra) without instituting a brand new large inefficient tax-payer funded monopoly.....

You've hit the nail on the head, eastwest101: government has no business attempting to administer projects that need to be done by the private sector, particularly from a cost-benefit perspective (a what?!)
We are talking about a government which, with every major program it has attempted to deliver, has proved itself the most wasteful and incompetent government in the history of Federation. The NBN is a sure-fire recipe for disaster.
It is on exactly the same track as its other recent train wrecks: the BER (Builders' Early Retirement fund); Batts are Burning (aka The Pink Batts Fiasco) for example.
Top-heavy boards and management structures dolling out taxpayer billions to large contractor construction companies whose directors pay themselves well over the odds, employing subbies who pay inexperienced workers a fraction of what an experienced installer demands. When the contractors head into receivership, the subbies will be left unpaid, as usual. The broke contractor company will be a separate entity, isolated from its parent, leaving the directors/owners with their million $ salaries and bonuses untouchable. Bonuses paid incidentally, despite having reached less than half of the already heavily downgraded targets. It is a matter of time…
Talk about déjà vu

 

[Skyring]

Part of the problem with the NBN is that no one knows what the future of the Internet holds. It hasn't been invented yet.

It'd be nice to be prepared when it happens. It WILL happen.

My guess is that it will involve more cough, more memes, more piracy and more "next big things" making squillions. I don't think we should have spent billions on something where we don't know what we're getting for the money.

 

[chrisb]

My guess is that it will involve more cough, more memes, more piracy and more "next big things" making squillions. I don't think we should have spent billions on something where we don't know what we're getting for the money.

Why not? Regardless of what it's used for it will be used, and it will pay itself off and provide a return on investment. What's the issue?

 

[Skyring]

Why not? Regardless of what it's used for it will be used, and it will pay itself off and provide a return on investment. What's the issue?

I very much doubt it will be finished, let alone pay for itself.

As for making a profit, you're dreaming.

The Coalition will pull the plug and cut the losses.

Now, obviously I don't have a crystal ball to see the future of the Internet, but the way it's gone so far is that people get around any attempt at blatant gouging, and they use it for whatever they bloody well want, which rarely coincides with what the government thinks they should want.

Julia Gillard promoting medical networks and startups and stuff is more political guff, more catchphrases and polemic. It's not designed to be believed or examined. It's dog-whistling to the people of Western Sydney, who reckon that faster HD cough and faster downloads are the go, especially if somebody else can be made to pay for it.

It was Rudd's thought bubble and Gillard's gamble. We shouldn't be spending billions on things where we don't know what we're getting, particularly when the technology is changing so fast. It's like all those early Twentieth Century visions of future metropolises, where every Art Deco skyscraper had a Zeppelin station.

Government has changed. It's no longer the experts who have worked their way into policy slots through merit and aptitude and skill making the plans for the future. Oh no. It's staffers out of uni dreaming up vote catchers, selling it to the boss, and then hiring people to get the rubber on the road.

I'm not against bright ideas and technology per se, but I've seen my share of technological disasters, subs that won't sink, jets that won't fly, computers that won't compute and so on, to be very bloody wary of propaganda that isn't backed up by sound research and a solid business plan. Technology may come and go, but the principles of good planning and management have been around for a long time.

In years to come, maybe the international tourists will tick off all the boxes - Stonehenge, the Pyramids, Mallow Bay - and they'll marvel at all the saggy grey rotting optical fibre cables. "What's that, colorful local?" they will ask.

"That's the NBN: No Bloody Nous."

 

[chrisb]

Just about everyone in the tech area agrees that fibre to the home is the future and the best possible solution for the future.

You can't write off the NBN profit because it'll be ripped apart by a future government. That's just silly. If they choose to destroy it rather than let it be finished and become a viable business then that's their issue.

 

[Skyring]

Just about everyone in the tech area agrees that fibre to the home is the future and the best possible solution for the future.

Citation needed.

 

[Skyring]

You can't write off the NBN profit because it'll be ripped apart by a future government.

Yes I can. They will pull the plug on a white elephant, as per their longstanding commitment, and they will have a solid mandate to do it. That's how democracy works.

 

[vetrade]

Just about everyone in the tech area agrees that fibre to the home is the future and the best possible solution for the future.

.

I think that's supposition on your part and personally I think the genuinely entrepreneurial tech savvy people are already aiming at commercialising satellite/wireless networks for a lot less money that the NBN will cost.
The odds are that the NBN will be bordering on obsolete even before it is fully rolled out

 

[chrisb]

Yes I can. They will pull the plug on a white elephant, as per their longstanding commitment, and they will have a solid mandate to do it. That's how democracy works.

The threat of future destruction is not a valid reason for not doing things. Otherwise the opposition could just threaten to destroy everything the current government wants to do and nothing would get done.

 

[amaroo]

That was sort of the point that I was trying to make - its 28% slower than say the USA, so an episode of TV takes 1min to download in Aus as opposed to 40sec in the USA = not really a national emergency in my opinion.

Thats kinda what I was thinking......28% = 3.47Mbps = bugger all.

If we ended up matching the worlds best performing country (HKG - according to the review post above) we will end up spending around $1.2B for every additional Mbps. Not sure it's the best way to allocate funds given we can't fund Gonski, NDIS & a host of other programs.

 

[Skyring]

The threat of future destruction is not a valid reason for not doing things.

Think about it. If it's a credible threat, then it's a bloody good reason.

That grand sandcastle you want to erect on the beach? It's going to be swept away by the next spring tide. Nah, you say, it'll be too pretty.

 

[chrisb]

Think about it. If it's a credible threat, then it's a bloody good reason.

That grand sandcastle you want to erect on the beach? It's going to be swept away by the next spring tide. Nah, you say, it'll be too pretty.

Well in that case the liberals shouldn't cancel the NBN because the next time labor is in they'll just start it again and that would be a waste of money.

 

[Fruitcake]

I think that's supposition on your part and personally I think the genuinely entrepreneurial tech savvy people are already aiming at commercialising satellite/wireless networks for a lot less money that the NBN will cost.
The odds are that the NBN will be bordering on obsolete even before it is fully rolled out

So what you personally think trumps what you think is a supposition?

 

[casanovawa]

So we have moved from copper phone lines to mobile phones and tablets and loved the freedom that has given us and yet the 'future of the internet' seems to be moving from satellite and wireless back to fibre optic cable to the house... Funny old circle we will have moved through?!?! We'll all be sitting back at home will we on our desktops or watching even more tv and movies we've downloaded??

I guess its an idea that sounds good/cost effective in cities/territories like Hong Kong, Singapore and NYC, but a bit on the expensive side to get it out to every last community in the bush in Australia...

 

[chrisb]

The fibre to the home feeds high speed private wifi in the home for tablets and fixed devices.

Cellular wireless networks simply can't handle the volume of traffic that is required for multiple HD streaming in every home. Even having every home doing web over LTE would kill the technology. There's simply not enough spectrum available.

Also, compare fixed broadband with wireless costs.

 

[serfty]

ISTR Turnbull indicating in a general sense that if the Conservative coalition are elected they will not toss out the parts of the NBN that are completed.

They would however, for most intents and purposes stop further rollout.

Re Satellite ...

In June last year we relocated, still in suburban Melbourne. We had cable based pay TV. The new place had cable wired in the street, but FOXTEL refused to connect the cable. I pushed this as I preferred cable, but was basically told "They no longer do new cable installations" - ie, satellite or bust!

I think that's supposition on your part and personally I think the genuinely entrepreneurial tech savvy people are already aiming at commercialising satellite/wireless networks for a lot less money that the NBN will cost.
The odds are that the NBN will be bordering on obsolete even before it is fully rolled out

The reason I pushed for cable at the time was that we had had Satellite for many years through to late last decade. I was concerned about the relatively slow response times etc when compared to the Cable installation I had been enjoying. Information given was that it was not as slow these days.

I was extremely surprised to find that it indeed was quite responsive and HD was now available.

In fact it was as good as and better than the cable installation.

Technology marches on...

 

[whatmeworry]

There are provisions in the NBN rollout to switch to better and cheaper options if and when it becomes available.