Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: WTF - $43 billion bucks spent to improve porn download rates?!?!
Aussiegunneragain    4/7/2009 3:26:13 AM
So now that we are heading towards a recession with the prospect of a $100 billion dollar deficit over the next 4 years, our Dear Leader has decided to quadtriple the size of the National Broadband Network project to $43 billion bucks. Originally the project was "only" going to cost $9b, with $4.5b coming from the Government, but now the $4.5b will just be an initial payment. How much is the taxpayer going to end up paying for this monsterous white elephant of a project, $20b plus? WTF are people going to use all that bandwidth for anyway ... surely if the demand was really there then business would build it of its own accord? I don't know about you lot but don't want my taxes being flushed down the toilet by a Government making the old mistake of trying to pick winners. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Broadband price rise tipped under $43b plan Posted 2 hours 50 minutes ago Updated 2 hours 17 minutes ago Massive project: analysts are astonished at the upfront cost. (Reuters: Hannibal Hanschke, file photo) Video: PM announces broadband scheme (ABC News) Audio: Market rocked by Government announcement (The World Today) Audio: Press conference: Kevin Rudd unveils broadband plan (ABC News) Audio: Opposition slams Government plan (The World Today) Audio: Federal Government ditches broadband policy (The World Today) Audio: Tanner takes critics to task (The World Today) Audio: Dr Bill Glasson on the Government's national broadband network plan (ABC News) Related Story: Broadband plan 'a massive broken promise' Related Story: Rudd redraws broadband landscape Related Story: Tas gets first 'byte' at new broadband Related Story: Broadband network 'must accommodate rural needs' Related Story: Telstra defies downward market trend Related Story: Phone lines restored in NT Related Story: Disappointment over national broadband plan Related Link: Factbox: Key points about national broadband network Market analysts say broadband prices are likely to rise, after the Government unveiled an amibitious new $43 billion plan to build a national fibre-to-the-home broadband network. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has scrapped the broadband tender process in favour of forming a public/private company to build and operate a network which will cost over four times the amount of the original $9.4b proposal. Mr Rudd says the network will take eight years to build and give 90 per cent of Australian households download speeds 100 times faster than they currently experience. The 10 per cent of homes not covered by fibre-to-the-home will get upgraded wireless access. But analysts are astonished at the upfront cost and say they have concerns about the network's commercial viability. "I've got no idea what's driving the Government to do this," Ivor Ries, an analyst with EL and C Baillieu Stockbroking, says. "They're saying a network that will deliver 100 megabits per second, that would exceed current household consumption by a factor of 100 times. "[That] allows you to download several channels of television at the same time. "[So] what it will do is create a market for people selling downloads to homes - people selling movies for downloads to homes will obviously be big winners from this. "But is it going to provide some sort of magic shot in the arm to productivity? Probably not." Mr Ries says the new network is only financially viable if 80 per cent of Australians choose the access provided by the new cables rather than wireless internet access. "If they get only 60 per cent of the population using it, and people preferring wireless over this new cable, then the monthly access fee they're going to have to charge people will be prohibitive," he warned. "At the moment the average Australian household is spending about $40 a month on accessing the internet. "Whereas this proposal will require the average household to be paying somewhere round about $75-85 a month. "So you're talking there about a $35 to $45 a month increase in the cost of basic access for the average household." BBY Stockbroking senior analyst Mark McDonnell says it is hard to see how the private sector could make a return on such an expensive project, unless broadband prices rise significantly. "It's both audacious and paradoxical," he said. "The paradox being that if you can't find private sector support for a proposition around building a fibre-to-the-node network which might have cost $10 to $15 billion, let's up the ante and make it $43 billion and still ask for private sector support. "How's that going to happen?" But telecommunications analyst Paul Budde says Australians are getting top-level technology without waiting for a commercial company to provide it, even if home use will only be part of the new network. "You have to look at it in a totally different situation," he said. "You talk about the use of the infrastructure; not just for internet. You talk ab
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT
Volkodav       4/11/2009 4:52:48 AM
So you are getting external delivery now without the network? It doesn't look like this network is a pressing need for you to me.
 
I am getting the bare minimum, i.e. lecture notes, reading lists and assignments. Being able to stream the lectures etc. would make things much easier, reduce the amount of reading I have to do and help me  achieve a higher grade point; while still having time to spend with my family.
 
I don't think the average person understands just how transformational fiber to the home will be. I can see specific areas where it will improve my life while my brother, who is an IT proffessional, is excited about other effects that I can't fully comprehend.
 
It will be a great thing but it will take years to see how great.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    Volkodav   4/11/2009 7:19:13 AM

So you are getting external delivery now without the network? It doesn't look like this network is a pressing need for you to me.

I am getting the bare minimum, i.e. lecture notes, reading lists and assignments. Being able to stream the lectures etc. would make things much easier, reduce the amount of reading I have to do and help me  achieve a higher grade point; while still having time to spend with my family.

I don't think the average person understands just how transformational fiber to the home will be. I can see specific areas where it will improve my life while my brother, who is an IT proffessional, is excited about other effects that I can't fully comprehend.
 
It will be a great thing but it will take years to see how great.

I note that you still only talk about the benefits to you and don't even acknowledge the cost that it might impose on others.

 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    In any case ...   4/11/2009 7:37:06 AM
... it is still up in the air as to whether Fielding, Xenophon and the Greens will allow the enabling legislation for this project to pass through the Senate. I hope they don't and I urge anybody who feels the same way to write to them and express their view on the matter. I certainly will be. 
 
Whats more even if they do manage to get the enabling legislation up it is questionable whether they will raise enough private sector finance to fund the thing. After all, the only reason that they are going this way is because none of the bids for the original proposal could raise enough funds in the current environment. Of course that raises the risk that the Government will go and fund the whole ferkin' thing, but I reckon that the national debt will be well and truely blown out by their other spend thrift behaviors by the time they get around to that and they won't be able to. I also question whether the "Aussie Infrastructure Bonds" that are supposed to debt finance it will sell so well during a recession.
 
Here's a good article on the issue.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coalition draws the line at public funds for network
  • Phillip Coorey Chief Political Correspondent
  • April 8, 2009
Two amigos set out to build their own telco ... Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Minister for Communications Stephen Conroy.http://images.smh.com.au/2009/04/07/466128/kevinrudd_stephenconroy-420x0.jpg" width="420" />

Two amigos set out to build their own telco ... Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Minister for Communications Stephen Conroy. Photo: Glen McCurtayne

THE Federal Opposition has refused to commit to completing Labor's eight-year, $43 billion national broadband project should the Coalition be returned to government.

Nor was there an immediate guarantee yesterday that the Senate would pass legislation to establish the scheme.

The Opposition spokesman on communications, Nick Minchin, condemned the proposal as a joke that would incur more debt and would not be commercially viable. "We'll take to the next election a realistic policy proposal that won't put Australian taxpayers into hock and that will ensure the realistic delivery of better broadband services."

The Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, said the Government had dumped its election proposal to contribute $4.7 billion towards the building over five years of a national broadband network with a forecast cost of between $10 billion and $15 billion.

The Government's expert panel reported none of the bids from private companies was viable, primarily because all had trouble raising funds in the economic crisis.

Mr Rudd said the Government would instead set up a majority-owned, public-private company to build a faster and more comprehensive network at a cost of $43 billion over eight years.

Private investment would be sought for about half, and the Government, to be a 51 per cent stakeholder, would supplement its $4.7 billion contribution by issuing bonds, which involves going into debt. Mr Rudd said the scheme would create 25,000 jobs a year. He equated it to building the Harbour Bridge and the Snowy-Hydro.

But the Opposition Leader, Malcolm Turnbull, said the Government had wasted 18 months and $20 million in its first tender and called the new proposal "a second Telstra".

Mr Turnbull said no other government was advocating that a majority state-owned carrier provide broadband services in which "taxpayers carry the financial and technological risk".

A market report by Goldman Sachs JBWere said initial investor feedback was negative: "There was not one positive comment, and many said that there was no way that this will ever be built.

"The cost is enormous and many fear that at a time like this the Government is now just throwing money around. To make the returns stack up ? you need to be charging households about $100 per month."

The federal Greens leader, Bob Brown, said he supported the idea of an expanded national network. But the Family First senator, Steve Fielding, whose support will be vital if the Coalition opposes the legislation, was unimpressed. "The Government has had all the experts tender for this broadband network and been told by a panel of experts that 18 months after beginning the process it has to start again. What a waste of time."

Big business, too, was wary. The Business Council of Australia said it welcomed investme

 
Quote    Reply

LB    100mps   4/11/2009 8:23:45 AM
By way of comparison I'm in Florida and for $20 US a month my download rate is 1.5mps.  For $43 US a month I could have a 6mps download rate and have chosen to remain where I am.  I also pay separately for cable/sat tv.  Cable modem plus cable tv in my specific location is very expensive and not competitive.  That said it seems to make little sense not to have one high capacity line for all of ones needs if that results in a cost savings.  In my area one pays $70 to $100+ a month for cable/sat service.  For whatever reason I find it difficult to believe this will be significantly lowered just because both it and the web came over the same line especially given it's actually much cheaper where I am to have sat tv and DSL vs having either all sat or all cable.  So good luck with your national system...
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain       4/11/2009 9:06:23 AM

By way of comparison I'm in Florida and for $20 US a month my download rate is 1.5mps.  For $43 US a month I could have a 6mps download rate and have chosen to remain where I am.  I also pay separately for cable/sat tv.  Cable modem plus cable tv in my specific location is very expensive and not competitive.  That said it seems to make little sense not to have one high capacity line for all of ones needs if that results in a cost savings.  In my area one pays $70 to $100+ a month for cable/sat service.  For whatever reason I find it difficult to believe this will be significantly lowered just because both it and the web came over the same line especially given it's actually much cheaper where I am to have sat tv and DSL vs having either all sat or all cable.  So good luck with your national system...
Interesting input, thanks.

 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       4/11/2009 9:30:00 AM
The federal Greens leader, Bob Brown, said he supported the idea of an expanded national network. But the Family First senator, Steve Fielding, whose support will be vital if the Coalition opposes the legislation, was unimpressed. "The Government has had all the experts tender for this broadband network and been told by a panel of experts that 18 months after beginning the process it has to start again. What a waste of time."
 
Fielding is a goose, his opposition to it is most likely because he fears good Christians, such as himself, could be corrupted by high speed pornography. One of the things I like most about the internet is it makes it so much easier to identify and track perverts. Just look how many they are busting these days, where as before they could hide in plain sight through seeking positions of trust where they could access and abuse children, then intimidate them into silence.
 
I find it interesting that there are so many howls over the waste of money when Labor wants to build infra structure that will benefit most people yet propose to spend instead on new sports stadiums etc. i.e. SA Labor wants to build a new hospital and the opposition wants to build a sports and entertainment precinct instead....every time they win my naturally conservative leaning vote they go an do something I disagree with so intently that they lose my vote on conscience.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain       4/12/2009 12:57:50 AM

Fielding is a goose, his opposition to it is most likely because he fears good Christians, such as himself, could be corrupted by high speed pornography. 
 

I disagree, even though I don't like his morality politics he otherwise uses his balance of power vote sensibly and I don't think that his concerns with this are anything to do with pornography. I hope he blocks it.
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       4/12/2009 4:35:28 AM





Fielding is a goose, his opposition to it is most likely because he fears good Christians, such as himself, could be corrupted by high speed pornography. 

 





I disagree, even though I don't like his morality politics he otherwise uses his balance of power vote sensibly and I don't think that his concerns with this are anything to do with pornography. I hope he blocks it.


I disagree with individuals holding the balance of power. Whether the government of the day is Labor or Liberal they were elected to govern and deserve the right to do so. Having legislation reviewed and ammended is fine but having one person blocking every major bill that doesn't fit their narrow view of what the world should be flies in the face of democracy.
It is an unfortunate fact that Fielding will likely get a quota when he next faces a ballot, I just hope that either Labor or the Liberals get enough senate seats to make Fielding an Mr X irrelivant next time round. I would rather have an effective opposition or a middle of the road minor party that can be negotiated with and have the country run for the good of the majority than the current situation where individuals and interest groups can dictate to all.
 
Quote    Reply

FJV    Dunno   4/12/2009 7:07:54 AM
With companies increasingly sending large 3D CAd files, video confreneces, ect. around, such investments may not be all that bad.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Ot might be a defense measure masquerading as a civil program.   4/12/2009 7:31:30 AM

 

I see it as a good thing, no a great thing. It wont be the fastest system in the world but it will be up there and above all it will be scaleable, i.e. its speed can be increased as required through upgrading the exchanges.

 

It will make copper lines obsolete and will not suffer the band width limitations a wireless network would.

 

This is probably the best thing the government has done since coming to power.

 

A modern EMP resistant information network with a national firewall sectional defense architecture is just the EW ticket in a world filled with PRC bandits.

Mister Rudd may not be as stupid as some think.
 
Herald
 
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics