National Broadband Network (NBN) cost-benefit analysis released
Their trying to trick all the sheep again by pulling the wool over their eyes
BUT does not work with me
how can a half finished network be better off for everyone
its only better off for the people who get paid to finish it!
CrazyNeutrino said:
National Broadband Network (NBN) cost-benefit analysis releasedTheir trying to trick all the sheep again by pulling the wool over their eyes
BUT does not work with me
how can a half finished network be better off for everyone
its only better off for the people who get paid to finish it!
CrazyNeutrino said:
National Broadband Network (NBN) cost-benefit analysis releasedTheir trying to trick all the sheep again by pulling the wool over their eyes
BUT does not work with me
how can a half finished network be better off for everyone
its only better off for the people who get paid to finish it!
My suggestion is you read the document – I’ve started, but it’s long – and use it to form an opinion on how the assumptions they used in the analysis may have affected the outcomes.
My (very) preliminary analysis seems to suggest:
I think trusty ol’ wireless evolved some since fibre started being rolled out, which was a while back now, I still remember the fibre up Alice way from down south here was laid and still unterminated in 1993 think it was when did a trip back up there, so it’s a while back.
And we had even then and stretching way back very trusty high-UHF and microwave terrestrial links courtesy Telstra all over the country (still in service many of them I guess), so wireless has served this country well.
“Optical fibre” might have gone a bit over-vogue.
diddly-squat said:
My suggestion is you read the document – I’ve started, but it’s long – and use it to form an opinion on how the assumptions they used in the analysis may have affected the outcomes.
Details are a bit sketchy so far, haven’t had time to read the actual report itself.
But it seems to read straight out of the free-market evangelists playbook. Their preferred model is to let private investment build the network, but only in selected areas where private investment would get a return on investment (eg capital cities).
Their modelling is over the period 2015 to 2040. Seems to be assuming that either the FTTN plan will not become obsolete within this period, or if it does that private investment will finance the upgrades required to something better. This flies in the face of recent experience, where private investment has refused to build an upgrade even to FTTN levels of service. It’s the whole point behind the ALP planning to fund the whole lot publicly, that private investment would never see the thing built. Unless there has been some drastic change there, then the assumption doesn’t hold. Eventually we’ll end up with an obsolete network and we’ll have to turn to public funds to upgrade it.
The report also seems to be suggesting that Turnbull is wasting public funds by providing any publicly subsidised service upgrades to the bush.
its a waste of public funds the way its going in
stuff is being installed in laundry cupboards
fibre is being cut with kitchen scissors
the whole thing hangs off fragile gyrock walls whilst holding a large and heavy lead acid battery
they need their brains testing
wookiemeister said:
its a waste of public funds the way its going instuff is being installed in laundry cupboards
fibre is being cut with kitchen scissors
the whole thing hangs off fragile gyrock walls whilst holding a large and heavy lead acid battery
they need their brains testing
Close enough for government work hey!
wookiemeister said:
the whole thing hangs off fragile gyrock walls whilst holding a large and heavy lead acid battery
It weighs approximately 2.7 kg.
