2007 Federal Election - Coalition or Labor/Howard or Rudd? (1 Viewer)

[Iron]

It's great. Another example of a responsible policy, which is bad for the Coalition and good for Labor and the nation. None of this crazy Latham shit.
Kev's on fire. Real leader stuff. He only needs half the swing Whitlam had. HALF.

 

[Sparcod]

Some of the polls are showing that Rudd is more popular than Beazley and Latham were.

There you go: Kev's on fire.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

It's great. Another example of a responsible policy, which is bad for the Coalition and good for Labor and the nation. None of this crazy Latham shit.
Kev's on fire. Real leader stuff. He only needs half the swing Whitlam had. HALF.

hmmm, i wouldn't really call taking money out of a pretty needed future fund to be a rettibly responsible policy...but that's just me.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

It's infrastructure investment, not pure expenditure, yes? A better broadband network would, I assume, bring economic rewards over time.

Personally my favourite infrastructure investments are freeways, ports and railway networks. I'd like this broadband thing to work out well, but I'm finding the relatively low cost to seem odd.

 

[Iron]

hmmm, i wouldn't really call taking money out of a pretty needed future fund to be a rettibly responsible policy...but that's just me.

From what I understand, it's totally fine. But if anyone were to get the rough end, it would be the baby-boombers. And frankly, I think it's time that they fucked off. No generation will ever have it as easy as them. They've been totally irresponsible and selfish in their pursuits.... but that's just me.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

haha, touche. i was listening to steve price this afternoon (i like to see how the other half thinks), and he seemed to be of the exact nature you described. he was particularly concerned in regards to the security of the funds he has amassed throughout the years. typical self-interest i suppose, but then again, one can understand why they're concerned. they've been promised a healthy retirement and decent healthcare when they're old and frail. a government taking money out of their little security package to pay for the younger generations would obviously stir them up a bit, even if that is a rather greedy thought of theirs.

 

[jb_nc]

Uh, even I have to admit that the future fund is some mad bullshit. It's basically nothing compared to the grand scheme of things.

They may as well take money out of it for FTTN (or is it FTTH?) because it would help Australia so much.

 

[kenny156]

supposedly with the money spent on broadband, it will eventually lead to income flowing back into the future fund. am yet to see how that works-only heard it briefly on the news.

hope the baby boomers have enjoyed their lot, because with the fuck all funding for aged care, they sure as hell aren't going to be able to go into a nursing home.

 

[Iron]

The Australian reported a few weeks ago that over half Australians >55 are worth >$1 million. Other reports indicate that, thanks to medicine and workplace flexibility, they'll be working well into their 70s before retiring. I think that the great bulk of them can look after themselves. But I admit that they're very politically powerful, and it's just a reality that politicians have to make them happy.

However, The Australian also reported yesterday that the broadband plan can be worth around $33 billion in the growth opportunities it will create.
Meh.

 

[Triangulum]

supposedly with the money spent on broadband, it will eventually lead to income flowing back into the future fund. am yet to see how that works-only heard it briefly on the news.

I assume that the idea is:
Broadband expansion = economic growth = higher total earnings = higher tax revenues = more money for the Future Fund.

 

[kokodamonkey]

still. shouldnt be taking money out of the future fund to pay for it. And the government shouldnt be paying for these oc pipeline's either. Its for private enterprise to provide not the government!

 

[jimmayyy]

i think the state result will help keep howard there. i cant see the majority of people wanting a labour monoply, but like someone said i can see him losing the senate, if only by a little bit.

talking personally, ill be voting coalition and howard unless something drastic happens between now and then

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

I really don't think people will care about any of this Labor monopoly bullshit. The fact that it's only really been mentioned a day after Iemma was re-elected makes me think that it might just be some typical, false Liberal propaganda.

 

[kokodamonkey]

I really don't think people will care about any of this Labor monopoly bullshit. The fact that it's only really been mentioned a day after Iemma was re-elected makes me think that it might just be some typical, false Liberal propaganda.

i think u must be confused , liberals dont do propaganda. only labor.

 

[ur_inner_child]

Labor defends broadband plans

The federal government has no hope of convincing private telcos to fund a rollout of high-speed broadband to the capitals in three years, the opposition says.

Labor's communications spokesman Senator Stephen Conroy said today that all major telcos had said they needed significant economic and regulatory reform from this government before they could go ahead in developing a high-speed broadband network.

Communications Minister Helen Coonan said today prospects were good that a provider or group of providers could complete the rollout of a fast fibre broadband network within three years to capital cities, and then to the regions, without using public money.

Her comment followed the announcement by Labor leader Kevin Rudd last week of a $4.7 billion plan to deliver high-speed internet services to 98 per cent of Australians within five years.

His plan is that $2 billion would come from taxpayers, $2.7 billion from the future fund and $5 billion from private companies.

The government has criticised the plan, describing it as a smash and grab raid on the future fund.

But Senator Conroy said the government's proposal would not work.

"Helen Coonan seems to have ignored the fact that Telstra has written to the Australian Stock Exchange a few months ago to specifically state that they will not be building a national broadband network without significant regulatory reform,'' he told reporters.

"Helen Coonan and her government have said that there will be no reform until 2009.

"All of the rival telcos to Telstra have also said they need significant economic and regulatory reform from this government before they can go ahead.''

He said Ms Coonan and Prime Minister John Howard had been "sitting on their hands'' while hundreds of thousands of Australians have missed out on broadband connections.

Australian schoolchildren had been unable to get the educational opportunities of their counterparts in South Korea, Singapore, the UK, Germany, France and the US already had because they have been building fibre networks, Senator Conroy said.

"Australians are suffering,'' he said.

"Australia is sliding back, falling further behind because the Howard Government just doesn't get it when it comes to broadband.''

 

[poloktim]

i think u must be confused , liberals dont do propaganda. only labor.

olol. I think Rafy's avatar is a good example of Liberal propaganda.

Either way, a clause was placed in the legislation to sell Telstra that allowed the government to take the Telstra shares out of the future fund (note I only said Telstra shares, not everything) at whim. Labor's plan is to take advantage of the clause that the government put in to fix infrastructure problems.

Besides, we should be moving into the 21st century. Australia is far from adequate with network bandwidth.

 

[volition]

While I do think that telecommunications technology improvement is the future, I don't like the idea of leaving it to the government to 'pick the winner', because the consequences for failure apply to everyone(we'd get taxed more/money could have been used on something else). Whatever we do, I at least hope Telstra isn't given any sort of 'special' power over the network that it can abuse, so hopefully it'll be a more open-access type deal amongst the ISPs.

I'd hate to see something arise like the problem we have now where ACCC is constantly on Telstra's back about Unbundled Local Loop prices and Telstra can get away with charging more on it's products for Wholesale than it 'costs' itself to use those same facilities.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

You know, perhaps if the Howard government had kept up with the times, and invested in this type of stuff as it was gaining momentum instead of when it was about to slam into us with full force, we wouldn't be in this future fund debacle to begin with. Good economic management, I'm guessing, also includes adequate investment in infrastructure, and the Howard government looks to have failed dismally in that regard.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

However, The Australian also reported yesterday that the broadband plan can be worth around $33 billion in the growth opportunities it will create.

Did they give an explanation for this? I'm probably fairly short-sighted but I can only see major benefits for media companies and on that same tone the general viewing public. These comments about it meaning we can have 'virtual classrooms' and 'virtual surgery' etc seem kinda odd to me as from what I understand we can already do so, just perhaps not as well as we could. I'd like to know in real terms some examples of the improvements, not general claims.

 

[Iron]

Did they give an explanation for this? I'm probably fairly short-sighted but I can only see major benefits for media companies and on that same tone the general viewing public. These comments about it meaning we can have 'virtual classrooms' and 'virtual surgery' etc seem kinda odd to me as from what I understand we can already do so, just perhaps not as well as we could. I'd like to know in real terms some examples of the improvements, not general claims.

I wouldnt know the specifics either mun - but faster file transfer would obviously allow business to increase work over the net, which leads to increased volume, efficiency and profit. The industry and media have embraced it, and full national internet coverage is nothing short of fantastic, in terms of creating opportunity and social equality.