• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Cont: Australian Politics II

Nope.

Mobile coverage is a major problem in a lot of the Blue Mountains. For a start, if you go over the edge of the escarpment, mobile coverage cuts out - total black spots all along. And that was with 3G/4G. 5G barely makes it to us from the local towers, and cuts out if you walk behind a decent sized tree. All that means locals too far from a tower or in a small valley all have zero mobile coverage. Non-locals who go bushwalking unwisely and fall off rocks or break their legs while abseiling, etc. (and they do, with monotonous regularity) can't call for help. We have been begging for clifftop repeaters for years...nothing from either political party.

Just use the existing copper wires? Sure...no. Run over poles and underground through iron-rich sandstone, they get flooded and are prone to deterioration over time. Bad quality copper voice lines were not good for ADSL 20 years ago, let alone streaming now. We also get lightning storms, which take out our ancient exchanges and induce spikes through the aerial cables and wet, ferrous ground that blow up connected modems, routers, etc. Everyone here has about half a dozen old modems that have been zapped this way. With long copper cables to the furthest houses, signal quality is noticeably poorer for them. Also, some dwellings are kilometers from the nearest phone pole in mobile black spots (truly off-grid), and it is prohibitively expensive for them to have one crappy copper line run to their house (Telstra will do it, but it runs to tens of thousands of dollars).

So the solution for here is fibre-optic. It is cheaper than copper, very high performance, is immune to water and lightning spikes, and can be run dozens of kilometers with no signal loss. It can be literally buried in a dirt trench if needs be. All it takes is THE POLITICIANS GETTING OFF THEIR ARSE AND MAKING NBN INSTALL IT! Which they have promised for a decade now. It was going along OK, until it all came to a grinding halt when Malcolm Turnbull decided that it would be cheaper to integrate with the existing copper lines than take fibre to the premises. That was a decade ago... So we wait.
Add in Tony Abbott’s inane proclamation that nobody in Australia would need more than 25mb speeds!

But you are right. Fibre to the premises is the fastest technology now and will be capable of reaching Gigawatt speeds. Albo has committed an extra $3 billion to accelerate the roll out.

I suppose I’m biased though. One of my daughter’s in an executive with NBNCo.
 
Last edited:
Just in case anybody was laughing at Americans for voting Trump back in . . .
The odds are still against him. The Coalition needs to win a record number of seats, and the Teals are certain to feature strongly. There was barely be a preference from the Teals and Greens flow to Dutton.
 
Just in case anybody was laughing at Americans for voting Trump back in . . .
I expected exactly this. Murdoch controls much of Australia's media. Dutton has to do nothing more than say something and they will do the rest, tirelessly and relentlessly.
 
The odds are still against him. The Coalition needs to win a record number of seats, and the Teals are certain to feature strongly. There was barely be a preference from the Teals and Greens flow to Dutton.
Unless the libs win back seats taken by the teals, whoever is PM after the election is likely to be heading a minority government.
 
Unless the libs win back seats taken by the teals, whoever is PM after the election is likely to be heading a minority government.
I agree. I simply can’t see Dutton getting enough support to form a minority government.
 
I agree. I simply can’t see Dutton getting enough support to form a minority majority government.
I think that is what you were trying to say. He needs more support to get a majority government. It would be interesting to see what happens if the Liberals win more seats, but the Teals hold the balance of power. Who will they say is allowed to form government? Will it be whoever is prepared to make the biggest bribes concessions to them? Or will they support Labor no matter who has the largest party?
 
Dinner be fooled by the electoral college. In terms of actual vote it was very close and was really about a few swing states.
In spite of preferential voting, it is not much different in Australia. The winning party seldom gets much more than 50% of the 2PP vote. It all comes down to the marginal ("swing") electorates. (Thank goodness the Senate uses PR).
 
I think that is what you were trying to say. He needs more support to get a majority government. It would be interesting to see what happens if the Liberals win more seats, but the Teals hold the balance of power. Who will they say is allowed to form government? Will it be whoever is prepared to make the biggest bribes concessions to them? Or will they support Labor no matter who has the largest party?
No I’m not. Look up “minority government”. Educate yourself.

A minority government is one which falls short of enough seats to rule in their own right, but gets support from others to get over the line. Gillard ran a minority government.
 
No I’m not. Look up “minority government”. Educate yourself.

A minority government is one which falls short of enough seats to rule in their own right, but gets support from others to get over the line. Gillard ran a minority government.
You think there will be a Labor PM after the next election? Is that what you meant?
I know what a minority government is. And yes, the Gillard government was one such example.
 
You think there will be a Labor PM after the next election? Is that what you meant?
I know what a minority government is. And yes, the Gillard government was one such example.
Well why are you talking about anyone forming a majority government? No, I don’t believe you do know what a minority government is.
 
Well why are you talking about anyone forming a majority government? No, I don’t believe you do know what a minority government is.
In other words you are trolling me. You have not explained what you believe. I doubt I will respond to future such posts in this thread by you.
 
In other words you are trolling me. You have not explained what you believe. I doubt I will respond to future such posts in this thread by you.
You obviously haven’t this thread. I (and others) have made it clear that I believe that Labor will form a minority government.
 
You obviously haven’t this thread. I (and others) have made it clear that I believe that Labor will form a minority government.
Congratulations. First time for over a week you have mentioned the words Labor and minority government in the same post.
And I am laughing at your primitive attempts to attack me.
 
I know what a minority government is.
Not if you think that a party without a majority can form a majority government.

Where no party has a majority, three things are possible:
1. A major party forms a coalition with one or more minor parties such that they share the ministry and all vote together on government legislation.
2. A major party gets one or more minor parties to support them in key votes (eg confidence motions and supply bills) in exchange for some concessions.
3. If neither of the above is possible, then the GG selects a party to form government and they take pot luck with each piece of legislation.
 
Not if you think that a party without a majority can form a majority government.

Where no party has a majority, three things are possible:
1. A major party forms a coalition with one or more minor parties such that they share the ministry and all vote together on government legislation.
2. A major party gets one or more minor parties to support them in key votes (eg confidence motions and supply bills) in exchange for some concessions.
3. If neither of the above is possible, then the GG selects a party to form government and they take pot luck with each piece of legislation.
And if (as is the case) I know all of that?
 
Opposition leaders always promise to reduce taxes, increase spending, and balance the budget (by reducing the public service). These promises work because voters are stupid.

A major hurdle for Dutton is that unlike Trump, there is no voter suppression here (believed to be a major factor in Trump winning key swing states).
 
Opposition leaders always promise to reduce taxes, increase spending, and balance the budget (by reducing the public service). These promises work because voters are stupid.

A major hurdle for Dutton is that unlike Trump, there is no voter suppression here (believed to be a major factor in Trump winning key swing states).
The other differences are that it is not always easy to sack public servants, and it is not easy to transfer responsibility to the states. Whenever polls are held on taxation levels in Australia, a majority prefers greater levels of government services even if taxes rise.

I do not think Trump levels of tax cuts would be welcome here.
 

Interesting bit:

Liberal senator Dave Sharma, a former Australian ambassador to Israel, was perhaps surprisingly, less diplomatic.

"He's not a conventional US President," Sharma observed. "The first thing that he says is not necessarily where the US policy ends up."

This is the quiet bit the government can't say out loud. What Trump says is not necessarily what he does.

"Something Trump's own team often says about him," Sharma went on, "is take him seriously, but don't necessarily take him literally and that would be the sort of mantra I would adopt here."
 
Back
Top Bottom