leetom said:
On Telstra- as soon as Telstra becomes fully privatised, will it even be obligated to provide services in the rural regions? Once entirely privately owned, it should not be responsible for what standard of communications our rural population are receiving. What will happen then?
The USO will remain, and Telstra will still be subject to it given their largely government established dominant market position. This has been the case in other countries who have privatised telecommunications services, and I don't see any reason why we would deviate from this.
As to your second point, what you've said does have merit, but I'm not sure that economic practicality is an adequate way to assess the situation when what you're discussing is the way people have made a living up until now. Regardless of whether you dismiss it as cultural nostalgia, agriculture has played a significant role in our history, and I don't think letting such endeavours fold is in our best interests (Far better to shield them from the drought, then invest sensibly in improving technology, etc, in order to make them viable). Nor do I see people as being particularly willing to give up on farming for more financially viable endeavours, as I don't think money is the sole reason (Or any reason at all), why people would decide upon this lifestyle.
I also think a lot of people tend to forget that farming isn't an isolated industry. Without it there are effects which flow on to the rest of the economy. For example, due to the extended periods of drought, there are now less trains running wheat shipments (As the wheat hasn't grown), meaning less work for drivers and related staff. Regardless of whether people like it, and regardless of whether it's "financially viable", agriculture *does* form the basis for many forms of employment within our economy which one can easily overlook upon initial investigation of the issue.
