Stop the gay boats

The politically correct term is tug boats.

Depends, a lot of economists were predicting that Abbott's implied policies (since he hadn't announced them, don't know what the re-assessment was) would drive Australia into recession. In the long run, climate challenges may not be dealt with either (the only mention of renewables in the Lib's new plans was an intention to launch another witchhunt into windmills by having another investigation into so called 'windtower disease').

What? Your crazy is showing.

Uh, which part? I was talking about -

Commentary like this, by Joseph Stiglitz (professor of economics at Columbia University and winner of the Nobel Prize in economics, however much that's worth), who said:

"In this election, the conservative side of politics has foreshadowed substantial cuts to the government budget. This would be a grave mistake, especially now.
Recent experience around the world suggests that austerity can have devastating consequences, and especially so for fragile economies. Government cuts have helped push Britain, Spain and Greece's economies deeper into recession and led to widespread public misery."

And this:

"The only other reference to the country’s $20bn renewable industry is the repeat of a promise made last December to hold yet another investigation into the health impacts of wind farms, and confirmation of a previously leaked commitment to require “real time” monitoring of wind turbine noise – a move that wind energy groups say would involve “crippling” costs."

(i.e. playing to the crazies like faceman and the people that they have misled)

I can almost feel the butthurt through my screen. Labor has lost Fpot, just cop it on the chin and move on.

Regarding the electronic voting mentions earlier, Turnbull is pushing for voting machines -

Jesus christ. What a bunch of absolute muppets.

It is pretty upsetting.

wind turbines make people depressed, it's an actual thing

it's the noise of it. Apparently it's like old fashion torture instrument lolz

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1452529/Wind-farms-make-people-sick-who-live-up-to-a-mile-away.html

I can feel wifi, usually it's in the form of frustration and anger.

A great candidate for the position.

It's OK for Liberal to give the job to the Boys Club, not labor though, no that's dirty.

Jobs for the boys.,..

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-10/ziggy-switkowski-tipped-to-head-nbn/4947470

Next up - 3 Ziggybyte NBN plans for all!

It's okay, she's an LNP member, the law doesn't apply to her!

LNP, the Accountable Government.

Thought this was a pretty interesting read.http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/09/tony-abbott-election-victory-labortldr: Braindead politics caused labors downfall, some interesting quotes below. Particularly given some on here's views about the economy and debt.

Yeah, Labor were the worst self-advertisers in the history of f*****g anything, it's like they didn't even know the strengths of their own policies half of the time and walked straight into saying the wrong things (e.g. for some stupid reason Rudd was trying to claim that the nbn was "free"), nor did they seem to have any awareness of or make any attempt to correct the public's misunderstandings about them, such as being big taxers and spenders (where spending grew slower under them than under Howard, and taxes are lower), where it's actually the last coalition government whose been the largest taxers and spenders in recent decades (and selling national assets at arguably subpar rates to maintain that).

tldr: Braindead politics caused labors downfall, some interesting quotes below. Particularly given some on here's views about the economy and debt.

*

tldr: Braindead labor politicians caused labor's downfall,

Ziggy was CEO, chairman and managing director Kodak Australaisia... Sounds like just the guy we want.

Come on infi old boy, I thought you of all people would know how these old boy hook ups work ;)

My greatest concern is that the PM's Chief of Staff, a position of power and responsibility, can't even count her own drinks. We're in good hands people!

Judges are appointed for life, they don't give a s*** which party anyone comes from!

Just...wow.
If the boot was on the other foot i.e. a Labor staffer, can you honestly say you would have the same response?
From what I've seen on here and elsewhere, Libs love to put the boot in, but are suddenly sympathetic when one of their own has a stumble.
I would actually respect you as a Liberal supporter/member/whatever if you conceded that not everything they do is 100% above reproach. No political party is 100% right all the time, and the snide, gloating, dismissive and entitled Liberals like you and others who carry on with this holier than thou BS are the Libs own worst enemy as far as I'm concerned.

Mmm, not sure you'd class a political staffer as a public servant. Does she hold an official position within DPMC for example? I could be wrong though.

However, it's not a huge incident for someone who otherwise has a successful career and is generally a good member of society to have no conviction recorded when they plead guilty to a low-level drink driving charge. That's a pretty standard MO for many (most?) magistrates.

Typical partisan bs from pretty much everyone in this thread on this one, imo. But hey, it's a qgl politics thread what other outcome is there.

Staffers are not public servants, they are employees of the MP or Minister and subject to a whole different set of rules (no unfair dismissal is the main one) and enterprise agreement. That being the case this complaint is about the judiciary. Credlin offered to plead guilty and threw herself at the mercy of the court.

Slagging off at a judge because you're dirty at a private person's conduct (they are not elected) is just lame. Get a new line. She admitted she made a mistake.

Are you suggesting that Credlin is connected to the magistrate who heard her case? Citation?

I have never been done for any form of drink driving etc etc etc.
Would I get off with no fine if I blew 0.075 ? Even if I had a wonderful character reference from a person of good standing with in the community?

The answer is no.

I base this on the fact I owed the ATO $5.10 lodged over over 18 months too late. Got fined $850 for $5.10 ... winning!

How on earth do either of you know that?

I personally know someone who got done for mid-range DD in NSW who was issued a section 10 (no conviction recorded) because they had a character reference and were otherwise an upstanding member of society. This person's lawyer said that it wasn't an uncommon occurrence for this to occur if it was a first offence but obviously cannot be counted on as it is up to the individual magistrate.

Stop trying to be arm-chair lawyers when you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

edit: wtf am i doing, engaging fpot on a politics thread...

There was no conviction recorded for this friend of yours, but were they still suspended from driving and fined?

No. They had to pay court admin costs (the same as Peta Credlin) and had a good behavior bond for 12 months whereby if they committed another offence they would receive a conviction for both their second and original offences and the court would view this particularly unfavourably given their lenient treatment the first time around. That's what a Sectoion 10 dismissal is in NSW iirc.

Is my understanding anyway (I am not a lawyer and this happened a couple of years ago).

i have no clue which thread to post this in - but sign on to this useless petition.

http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/the-liberal-party-of-australia-reconsider-your-plan-for-a-fttn-nbn-in-favour-of-a-superior-ftth-nbn

this info is good to know for when i eventually get done for DD, i have a pretty awesome character reference all lined up from that time i had to go to court just because i peed in the mall.

god cops are so uptight.

How on earth do either of you know that?I personally know someone who got done for mid-range DD in NSW who was issued a section 10 (no conviction recorded) because they had a character reference and were otherwise an upstanding member of society. This person's lawyer said that it wasn't an uncommon occurrence for this to occur if it was a first offence but obviously cannot be counted on as it is up to the individual magistrate.Stop trying to be arm-chair lawyers when you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.edit: wtf am i doing, engaging fpot on a politics thread...

I had a mate who had the same thing happen to him. Blew 0.05 and got a section 10, which is good because he wouldn't be a commercial pilot right now if a conviction was recorded.

Talking to him about it, he said it is pretty default if you are low range and have no prior convictions.

Okay, don't you think that it's a bit unfair that a person who might not have such a good job, who keeps to themselves a bit yet is just as morally pure as the person you described would in all likelihood not be able to obtain a character reference and a lawyer skilled enough to get them off?

Huh?

Well in your hypothetical situation this hypothetical person would also have had no prior problems with the law, assuming that's what you mean by "morally pure". Secondly, I'm not sure what you think a character reference is but it is essentially a letter from a person to the court. Unless this person had absolutely no friends or acquaintances in good public standing there is no way they would be unable to obtain a character reference. So it sounds like the personal circumstances would be pretty similar and that it would essentially come down to luck of the draw with the magistrate.

My understanding of the event I described earlier is that the lawyer barely said a word in the court. The lawyer's skill was completely irrelevant. The magistrate read the character reference, confirmed a few details about the incident with the defendant (if that's the right term) personally and then made a ruling. The entire thing took less than 10 minutes apparently.

I think your perception of what happens in a magistrates court for a low level DD offence is probably a bit off the mark.

Stop being a difficult twat for the sake of it.

Yes, if you have no prior convictions and end up in front of a court for any reason this may be taken into account depending on the circumstances. Yes, if you have a good character witness and end up in front a court for any reason this may be taken into account depending on the circumstances. Yes, I personally know someone where both of these things were taken into account when they received a Section 10 dismissal for a low range DD offence in NSW and yes this person's lawyer told this person that it was not an uncommon occurrence.

No, I can't definitively say what will occur in a hypothetical situation where you end up in front of a magistrate for obvious reasons. No, it is obviously not as simplistic as you are making it out to be.

My point is that Obes' and your claim that you know what would definitely happen in a hypothetical situation (i.e. if Obes was in front of a magistrate for a low range DD offence) is clearly bulls*** and more than likely you both know so. But that would run counter to the little circlejerk you have going in this thread.

Hopefully that clears things up for you.

Consumer confidence has soared to an almost three-year high, propelled by record low interest rates and the election of a coalition government.

http://finance.ninemsn.com.au/newsbusiness/aap/8721452/consumer-confidence-at-a-three-year-highCome on baby let the good times roll

It indicates that consumers don't follow what economists are saying or look at the realities of the data, and are easily suckered into political narratives.

honestly fpot you can ask as many hyhpothetical c*** questions as you like

so much of it all comes down to how the magistrate is feeling on the day, if they got a root that morning, how the police prosecutor puts the story to the magistrate, the general vibe the magistrate gets from you etc.

some people are lucky enough to have s*** go their way, some aren't

f*** all you can do about it

Good to see the hairy clam is about to go;

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-11/misplaced-votes-extend-mcgowans-lead-over-mirabella-in-indi/4951666

Libs and their fans have always been the do as i say not as i do kind of people. None of this should be a surprise to anyone.

this so much, they demand a higher standard of others than they demand from themselves

take slipper or one, of just many

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-12/stephen-conroy-labels-new-labor-leadership-rules-a-farce/4952532

F*** me Conroy is a nasty peice of work, I really hope he doesn't end up on the front bench again.

Labor need to get back on the job of rebuilding in opposition. Call a ballot, get the shadow cabinet sorted already.

Labor Senator Stephen Conroy labels Kevin Rudd's new leadership-selection rules a 'farce'

Internet labels Stephen Conroy's a c-.

Actually, you know what? Step up, Conroy, you tosser. Let's see you at the front so you're the scapegoat for everything that goes wrong, and then maybe finally the rest of Australia - the non-IT industry - will see what you're worth.

The LNP plans to axe clean energy bank despite the fact it's making money - link

LNP, The Science Fearing Government.

It's not making any money and no where in that article does it say it is.The whole point of this corporation is to give out nonviable loans for nonviable Green energy projects.Thus it should be scrapped. Typical stupidity suggesting they are "climate change denying" because they are abolishing such a wasteful government own corporation.

The reality is that once the CEFC was setup and the board of directors was staffed, it was able to meet its objectives without making loans at below market rates or with higher than normal commercial expectations of bad debts. Basically, the CEFC is no more a drain on the budget or a waste of money than putting money in a bank. The only reason to scrap it is ideology and politics, not economics or science.

You can read more here: http://www.cleanenergyfinancecorp.com.au/media/63369/factsheet-cefc-and-the-budget_lr.pdf

edit because I assume nobody will actually look at that: a quote from the fact sheet

Under its Investment Mandate, the CEFC is required to apply commercial rigour when making investment decisions, focusing on projects and technologies at the later stages of development. By adopting a commercial approach, it is expected that the Corporation will invest responsibly and manage risk so it is financially self-sufficient and achieves abenchmark rate of return.

Science Fearing Government.

why would anybody be fearing science? That's probably the most stupid thing I've heard all day. It's like fearing art or engineering or sport, doesn't make sense....

IMO fpot if it's worth changing your pic you gotta rock that Pinkman avatar. No half measures.

Change is scary in the LNP world bro! B****!

The LNP plans to axe clean energy bank despite the fact it's making money - link

It is making money because it has access to funds at an artificially low rate. If it had to source its funding from the market like every other financial entity that doesn't receive its funding directly from the government at the effective risk free rate this could be a very different story.

The reality is that once the CEFC was setup and the board of directors was staffed, it was able to meet its objectives without making loans at below market rates or with higher than normal commercial expectations of bad debts.

I think your claim that it is making loans at market rates that reflect the level of risk inherent in the loans is questionable at best. For example, fpot's link states that the loans it has made thus far are returning an average of 5.8%. I think this is below market rates for loans to entities of that nature and risk.

For example, a relatively recent bond issue by ANZ has an interest rate of BBSW + 3.4%.Today the relevant BBSW = 2.6150% so the coupon on this bond issue is 6.015% (2.6150% + 3.4%, won't get into differences between coupon and yield for sake of simplicity - assume bond at par). Now I think it is pretty much a given that ANZ debt is far less risky than debt issued to green technology companies. So why do the loans to the green technology companies have on average a lower interest rate than those to ANZ? Unless you genuinely believe that the loans that the CEFC has made thus far are less risky than ANZ debt?

The answer, in my opinion, is that the loans to the green technology companies are not being made at a rate that accurately reflects the risk of these loans. This should be obvious conceptually as well - because if the CEFC was making loans at market rates that accurately reflect the risk of these loans then there would be no reason for the CEFC to exist in the first place! This is because the green technology companies would already be able to source debt at the same rates from the market thus negating any need for a publicly financed entity to be doing the exact same thing. The very fact that the CEFC exists is a clear indication that the market is not willing to provide debt to these companies at the same rates that the CEFC is currently doing.

Now this is not to say that the CEFC is inherently a bad idea - you can make the argument that this explicit subsidy to green technology companies is in the public interest as the positive externalities of green technology companies becoming successful are worth the effective government subsidy that publicly financed loans from the CEFC at below market rates represents. But that is a different argument altogether than the one you are trying to make.

In essence that is what the different in positions between the ALP and Coalition on the CEFC boils down to: ALP believes that the potential for these positive externalities in the future is worth a publicly financed subsidy whereas the Coalition does not.

edit: holy horrible formatting batman. posting from phone, should be fixed meow.

This is because the green technology companies would already be able to source debt at the same rates from the market thus negating any need for a publicly financed entity to be doing the exact same thing. The very fact that the CEFC exists is a clear indication that the market is not willing to provide debt to these companies at the same rates that the CEFC is currently doing.

How does that compare with what offerings are available to traditional energy sources within Australia? I don't know how it works over here, but I know in the US oil companies (for example) have historically had access to tax benefits that also massively upset "market rates".

i.e., from my limited perspective, it looks like market rates for these sorts of massive things are distorted anyway

t's ironic that Fpot tried to lie and say the Green energy finance corporation was making money. If anyone else gets the slightest thing incorrect let alone lie, he goes bat s*** nuts.

He didn't lie and he is technically correct.

It does make money albeit with significant government assistance. If it had to source its fund directly from the market it may not necessarily make money but that is not what fpot said.

My naive guess would presumably be... Because the goal is to help startups of this kind through favourable conditions in the hope of solving a problem and positioning Australia to be a leader in future valuable technologies? (which very successful investors and entrepreneurs such as Buffet, Musk, Gates, etc, are investing in too?).

Who else may or may not be investing in similar companies is irrelevant to the discussion above.

If it wasn't 100% clear, I posed that question rhetorically and answered it in the following paragraphs - namely that these subsidies (i.e. loans at below market rates) are argued to generate positive externalities in the future (e.g. cheaper renewable energy). Australia becoming a leader in renewable technology could be loosely argued to be another positive externality.

It's ironic that Fpot tried to lie and say the Green energy finance corporation was making money. If anyone else gets the slightest thing incorrect let alone lie, he goes bat s*** nuts.But if the projects were so viable, they could easily get loans etc from the private sector without the need of a government corporation

Read the document I linked. Almost all of the loans are majority private sector with assistance from the CEFC. It isn't like they are providing loans to companies that commercial banks won't touch. e.g.

CEFC co-financed $50 million as part of the refinancing of Victoria’s $1 billion Macarthur Wind Farm. The total refinancing was $529 million and was provided by a syndicate of co-financiers including ANZ, NAB, ING, Shinsei, ICBC and EKF. CEFC participated on the same terms as the other banks with the exception of EKF (the Danish export credit agency which is lending on a fixed rate for 18 years to support Danish exports and Danish jobs). The CEFC played a critical role in this transaction to provide market liquidity to ensure efficient pricing.

Lending on the same terms at other banks.

I am sure Obes is a decent bloke in real life but I don't think his social standing as QGL forum grump would be enough to get him off unfortunately.

pfft ... I am an upstanding grump

The world needs grumps to make positive people seem positive.

Some people fear science because it challenges their preconceived beliefs and ideals. A reason people specifically fear climate science is because to effectively combat it will cost money and in some cases people will be forced to alter their lifestyles. edit: Racist science fearer MP Dr Dennis Jenson wants to be science minister - linkApart from being an open science-denier, he is also openly racist.

so you think because he denies press release science like CO2 causes global warming climate science he is wrong,

Yet you don't bother to consider any sides of the argument. Climate change is the result of many different things...

http://www.warwickhughes.com/hoyt/climate-change.htm
http://www.warwickhughes.com/hoyt/scorecard.htm

What's with the all of a sudden crackdown on posts after the election that are actually on topic and not breaking the rules? Mainly focused at me, fpot and pjano. Especially with silly/rude reasons like "shutup" and "another boring troll" and "offtopic"It's getting really annoying and disrupting the debate/argument and is just unnecessary. Which mod is doing this?

I agree, one of the reasons was "wrong" when it was a paper saying 2.5% of people are disturbed by low frequency noise. Disagree if you wish, or remove the personal attacks, but don't take away our freedom of speech.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1184900_418434414933035_1238442924_n.jpg

http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/2212/6cs2.jpg

Not a great deal of talent to choose from in the Labour Party is there.

So there's another election on shortly, Albo vs. Shoreton for Opposition leader.

I think Albo's not the most appealing to joe public, and what I've seen of him speaking on Q&A seemed a bit awkward. Shoreton seems more composed and has the backing of NSW Right (which will deliver some much needed stability).

Albo probably has the backing of the rank and file voters who get a say now courtesy of Rudd's reforms to put a shield on his back if he won the election ... who's gonna win, and who do you think is a better leader?

shorten seems like a smart operator.

lets give him a turn at the wheel!

Albo is your typical drunk brawler from down the pub. Not really PM material.

We have a new government yet are TV screens are still being spammed with Labor Leadership problems. zzzzzzzzzz go away!

We have a new government yet are TV screens are still being spammed with Labor Leadership problems. zzzzzzzzzz go away!

What the f*** are you on about. Leadership spills are common after an election for the opposition ya git. Nothing new. Go back to school kid and this time learn something.

What the f*** are you on about. Leadership spills are common after an election for the opposition ya git. Nothing new. Go back to school kid and this time learn something.

I know, i didn't say they weren't. Please read carefully.

What i'm saying is that the Labor Leadership is once again the main news going around and we are hearing little coverage about our new government. This is due to the chaotic process of choosing a new Labor leader. Not everyone agrees on the rules of selecting a new leader and now it looks like its going to on a month long ballot with 2 candidates going head to head so we can expect infighting in true Labor style. When the Liberals lost in 2007, it was a simple and calm transition to a new leader, but in true Labor style it has to be chaotic.

We are already hearing rumours of a Rudd comeback from Craig Emerson, he just simply cannot give it up even though people don't want him and Federal Liberal Director Brian Loughnane has ordered all campaign staff to keep all advertising and material prepared about Mr Rudd's leadership in case he attempts a comeback.

Just get off our TV screens already, we voted out this chaos! It's time to enjoy our new competent government. It's time to commence operation sovereign borders!

Just get off our TV screens already, we voted out this chaos! It's time to enjoy our new competent government. It's time to commence operation sovereign borders!

You should write to the leader of the new govt, Rupert Murdoch, he'll make it go away.

Clive Palmer the new Faceman of bat s*** crazy

Julia Gillard: power, purpose and Labor’s future

Labor comes to opposition having sent the Australian community a very cynical and shallow message about its sense of purpose.

The decision by Labor caucus to change leaders in June this year was not done on the basis of embracing a new policy agenda; it was not done because caucus now believed Kevin Rudd had the greater talent for governing. Caucus's verdict of 2010 on that was not being revoked.

It was only done - indeed expressly done - on the basis that Labor might do better at the election.

maybe faceman is clive palmer

maybe faceman has been clive the whole time

i think we're onto something. has anyone ever seen them in the same place at the same time? hmmmmmmm

A positive move, but to put it in sarcastic perspective, I'm sure that bit of ideological grandstanding will save a few drops in the pond which makes it okay for them to cut the revenue generating programs.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/2013/09/14/15/07/rudd-top-strategic-thinker-ex-us-officialSurely they must be taking the piss?

too bad his top strategic thinking didn't save him from Gillard

The Labor leadership chaos continues. Gillards comments on Kevin and Labor were stinging.

The Labor leadership chaos continues. Gillards comments on Kevin and Labor were stinging.

Does this guy ever shut up?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/Global-cooling-Arctic-ice-caps-grows-60-global-warming-predictions.html

Ice Free Arctic by 2013 !

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/08/article-2415191-1BAEE1D0000005DC-503_640x366.jpg

...

I don't know what's sadder...


the money Optus is now throwing us at work to come back or the money Telstra is offering to their staff to take voluntary redundancy.


either way - we'll be back at work tomorrow morning doing the same Telstra job for a third the wage as contractors.. copper or fiber.


F*** you Labor. This happened under your watch.


You were supposed to save us from the f*****g Liberals...

last edited by koopz at 23:07:25 15/Sep/13

last edited by koopz at 23:08:17 15/Sep/13

Labor did not conduct a cost benefit analysis or even properly cost out the rollout of the NBN. It was haphazard every step of the way. Quigley and Conroy are accountable.

Now we have a competent government the contractors will have the chance to deal with a competent Minister. The whole project may actually be run in a sustainable and business like manner.

I feel sorry for the contractors who were screwed by the NBNCo under Labor. They are just trying to make a living.

I wonder what the Greens would have done to address Labor's joke rollout.

Not prior to announcement of the policy and scope, a report you do afterwards is like getting an engineer in after you build the bridge.

And amazingly the reports supported the policy!

the NBN is not scheduled to be built until the next decade....

dafuq?

Not prior to announcement of the policy and scope, a report you do afterwards is like getting an engineer in after you build the bridge.And amazingly the reports supported the policy!

Not unlike how they're planning to do a CBA on the fraudband with the parameters of time and cost, rather than overall which is a better plan. A REAL CBA would show FTTP to be superior, that's why the CBA will be cooked so the parameters exclude the possibility and show FTTN is the best for the 2 years + under 30 billion parameters.

Everything you've said applies double for the fraudband plan. The FTTP plan has been costed and started on. They're running within 3% of budget too and there have been multiple hearings (including a senate hearing) about how the project is going and it was on track.

Meanwhile FTTN is barely cheaper and that's before factoring in the 11+ billion for the copper network and maint on it. That's ALSO including the $5 billion of work they did for the labor NBN, which they're going to use (and totally ignore that $5 billion tag from their costings) for the FTTN. And don't forget the year delay before anything even starts on it.

If they actually did a legit CBA, you'd find that the FTTN "plan" they have will end up costing more to the tax payers for a tiny increase of speed over what we have now. Installing an obsolete technology and claiming "It'll do" is amazingly short sighted and stupid. Factor in the fact that in 5-10 years they'll have to rip it all up for fibre and the cost grows again, and that's not including lost business due to s***** internet.

My only hope is that they stall the FTTN and get their asses booted out next election and labour can get their s*** sorted and finish the project off.

please don't use the word 'fraudband' any more; I don't know what it is referring to and it's the sort of FUD term that clouds the waters for any sort of rational debate

A CBA is fine for something like a road or piece of infrastructure that you don't receive any money back from but provide a resource to the community. This is not one of them.

excellent point?

HFC is pretty good (over 100mb/s). Anybody that thinks it's s*** is in denial. I'm on ADSL and downloaded a 3.5gb ARMA III patch in ~30 mins offpeak (2mb/s), so just watched some TV and ate food while waiting...

The only thing I could see the NBN being useful for is HQ video streaming to doctors but really it's better to see a doctor in person. Pretty much everybody has skype and you don't see people streaming to doctors now. Perhaps it might be useful for gaming but most games I play aren't laggy and I doubt the NBN would improve my reaction time.

I find that most nerds/nbn fanatics purposely ignoring facts about the NBN such as it's real price etc etc because they are so desperate to get it. They even ignore it's failings in the rollout. It's almost like they are hypnotized.

I think i mentioned before about the discussions over on Whirlpool where people are literally saying that the Australian economy WILL collapse because we aren't getting LaborsNBN which is just hysterical nonsense.

This was just days before the election....

NBN Co warned the Labor government of a $1.6 billion increase in the funding needed to build the national broadband network in the weeks leading to the election, after construction delays and weaker-than-expected revenue forecasts hit the project.

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_warns_it_needs_another_bn_EUi3gqMalLyYXmUMP06MVL

I'm on ADSL and downloaded a 3.5gb ARMA III patch in ~30 mins offpeak (2mb/s), so just watched some TV and ate food while waiting

yeah, during off-peak, sunny weather my adsl is actually pretty good too.

heaven forbid it rain though, or i try and do something at 7:00pm, might as well use my mobile phones data connection instead, less dropouts as long as i position my phone right next to the window.

At the old house, my ADSL was good during congestion, but failed during rain, or if a tech looked into the pit for whatever reason. Got 100mb cable connected to fix the dropouts during rain, got awesome speeds offpeak, acted "capped" when it was on peak though. apparently the system wasn't designed to support 2 home computers according to the optus tec I complained to. Probably should return his IT certificate back to the cerial box from where he found it.

At work we went from optus evovle (using copper tech) to fibre, insane improvement in speed and consistency. cost a mint though cause we had to pay to get the cables laid from the exchange.

If only there was some sort of plan to get all the fibre laid to almost everyone in one project, i'd certainly be happy to put mandatory money into it.

haha yes it did. I was kind of joking when I said reading and comprehension was hard for you but it really is, isn't it?

yes, i am sure that the libs nbn plan will come out 100% on budget or below budget

yes, i am sure that the libs nbn plan will come out 100% on budget or below budget

I'm guessing that like the plan for direct action climate funding, if the NBN isn't on budget they'll just need to cut more.
Guaranteed 25 megabits? Oops! That was a non-core promise, how about 8 megabits! Could be worse, could be 1 megabit!

Australia now has no Minister for Science. Also one woman in a cabinet of 19. Also a homophobe in charge of Social Services.

Conservatism and anti intellectualism ahoy!

Ministries gone, Citizenship, Multicultural Affairs, Science, International Development, Youth, Climate Change, Disability.

Ministries added, Border Protection.

Pesky science is waste and gets in the way of real progress and stopping the boats.

^ Further evidence that Julie Bishop is actually a man.

I sure was dumb calling the LNP out on their science-fearing.

lolz, on the news tonite they mentioned that afghanistan has more female ministers than australia at the moment.

No Minister for Science is better than the person they might appoint Minister of Science - http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/climate-sceptic-mp-dennis-jensen-wants-to-be-science-minister-20130912-2tltt.htmledit: wait, I thought you meant no Minister for Science yet, but there might not actually be a Minister for Science at all? lolzLNP, The Intellectual Government.

you're still going on about this? I prefer somebody with a PhD being science minister than some bulls****** like Al Gore or climate scientists. If you look at the actual radiation physics then the temperature will increase about 0.7-1.6 per century due to carbon dioxide. Even if we reduced our global emissions by 25% that would be about 0.5% of global emissions. So you're essentially spending billions of money to reduce global temperature by 1/1000 of a degree.



http://www.co2science.org/

I prefer somebody with a PhD being science minister

One who obviously didn't learn that their expertise in one matter doesn't give them expertise in another. If a dentist is disagreeing with the world's collective body of brain surgeons, and tries to sell themselves as equal because they have a medical degree, they are dishonest and an idiot.

or climate scientists

Because we can't have people from the field giving opinions which you don't like, oh no not at all, we can only have people from other fields giving opinions when it's what you want to hear.

It's mainly because your posts have nothing to do with science either, except for avoiding it.

What is it with internet conspiracy retards all thinking they are the special case? They are the one who have finally cracked it and deserve to be listened to? There is no point trying to reason with you - you can't reason someone out of a position they haven't reasoned themselves into in the first place. This is why you are mocked. Not because we just can't handle all the Earth shattering infos you are laying on us. The sooner you can accept that the sooner you can f*** off, so hurry up eh?

Right, just like evolution, and the big bang, and vaccines, etc.

LOL, there is not a lot of money in all of those fields you mentioned

It's mainly because your posts have nothing to do with science either

Ah, but I clearly just posted some strong rebuttal from inside sources which proves that CO2 and cow fart taxes are scams.

"Oh spooky implications about a lot of money, meaning I've just proved that the whole field is corrupt.

Post some facts and then I'll listen to you


I laughed at that picture btw

Looks like we now have to appoint women to cabinet, not based on their credentials/merit or ability but based on their gender.

Isn't that sexist in itself?

Hahahahahhaha, as opposed to your "There's a lot of money in climate science, the whole field is thus proven as corrupt"

I didn't say the field is proven as corrupt because of that. I based it on that video which you refuse to watch.

Hey, I wonder if this disparity of women in regards to other countries is because

a) there just aren't enough skilled women out there and it is YOU who is the real sexist for suggesting we should just hire those vapid c**** out of charity

or

b) because the leader of the LNP holds these sort of views

“What the housewives of Australia need to understand as they do the ironing is that if they get it done commercially it’s going to go up in price and their own power bills when they switch the iron on are going to go up.”

"I think it would be folly to expect that women will ever dominate or even approach equal representation in a large number of areas simply because their aptitudes, abilities and interests are different for physiological reasons"

"The problem with the Australian practice of abortion is that an objectively grave matter has been reduced to a question of the mother’s convenience."

"I think there does need to be give and take on both sides, and this idea that sex is kind of a woman’s right to absolutely withhold, just as the idea that sex is a man’s right to demand I think they are both they both need to be moderated, so to speak."

"While I think men and women are equal, they are also different and I think it's inevitable and I don't think it's a bad thing at all that we always have, say, more women doing things like physiotherapy and an enormous number of women simply doing housework"

"I want to make it clear that I do not judge or condemn any woman who has had an abortion, but every abortion is a tragedy and up to 100,000 abortions a year is this generation's legacy of unutterable shame."

It's a)

abortion is that an objectively grave matter

I don't think that Tony Abbott understands the word 'objective'. Just because his cult teaches that pre-neural cells have a mind through a magical soul doesn't make it an objective fact that there's anything more wrong with abortion than sneezing out snot or biting off nails.

YOU who is the real sexist for suggesting we should just hire those vapid c**** out of charity

The only vapid c**** I know of are Julie Bishop and Teresa Gambaro.

Bronwyn Bishop isn't vapid, I don't mind her because she reminds me of my late mother (wearing a hairdo she had 40 years ago).

Speaking of sad, Clive Palmer has really embarrassed himself with all his winging and carrying about rigged elections. He should have just gracefully let the count happen and rally for the next election..

Isn't he still in front though?

Will he keep whinging if he actually wins? He should just shut up until the count is finalised.

2 years from now: the labor party will have finally have decided who is their leader

Mental health and ageing has been replaced by health; mental health AND social services. 3 ministries. Haven't looked at how many other inaccuracies are in that colourful error ridden table.

Scott Morrison - Immigration and Border Protection

The poison chalice. Poor Scott.

Yeah but pretend for a minute that you aren't an idiot and that you agree climate change is a major problem. Don't you think those of us who think that way would be slightly concerned that a man who described climate science as 'absolute crap' has canned it along with the entire science ministry? Kind of reminds me of that scene in The Simpsons comet episode where they burn down the observatory so this never happens again!

So you're admitting that the further errors you described don't actually exist? Because how do you rationalise the loss of disability, resources and energy, tourism, multicultural affairs (wait I guess you wouldn't care about that because you're racist), youth, and housing and homelessness? Just merge 'em all together huh? Think of the savings!

Sounds dubious at best. Things like mental health and disability are major ongoing problems. Call me cynical, but there isn't a lot of money to be made in some of those cut departments and I have this terrible feeling that the LNP are making them disappear to help their faithful followers forget about them.

edit: you edited out the laughable climate change bit, but I saw it.

climate change awareness is a fundamentalist Green policy and it deserves to bite the curb and be stomped on like a c***roach that just crawled out from under it's rock.

you're not going to save the planet by raising awareness in your scientific debate that it's a real threat to the future of the temperate planet. you're not going to get people to stop combusting fossil fuel's and you're sure as f*** not going to stop any progress of capitalist development with your green agenda.

so just stfu already fpot, you right wing nutcase. your political fanaticism seems to stem purely from some kind of insecure underlying issue that you have of always needing to be a part of some greater community mob hivemind that together are displaying morally party politics to be 'in the right' and it's just sad.

enough talking, thank f*** Q & A is over for another week. more doing.

last edited by trillion at 23:38:48 16/Sep/13

wow trillion, way to board the fail boat.

So you believe consuming and polluting this planet is the way to go, who gives a f*** right, because it wont affect you into old age?

You know you may be right about the merging. Maybe it's not too bad. I still find the whole lack of science ministry a bit alarming though. Why on earth would you get rid of that?

Because the ministries aren't created and titled to further any particular agenda, they are created in a way that allows you to reward good service and keep as many people happy with as little dissention in the ranks as possible. If you can also use it as a basis for policy direction then that's a win :)

It's actually about 0.16C per decade but yeah it's not a major issue facing us.

I'm more worried about the general loss of biodiversity atm


edit: there's also the fact that coal and oil are non-renewable resources

The really amusing thing is that when pjano first started posting he tried to portray himself as someone in the science field who reads papers for a living. He thought that would give him the required credibility to start drooling away with his climate change denying garbage.

Major General Campbell will have the powers to bypass normal Defence Force command structures and will report directly to the immigration minister.

Lol getting the military to bypass military command structures, every book I've read that does something like that usually ends up with zombies or something. It can't be good...

Pjano, you sound a lot like SheerObesity.

Pjano, you sound a lot like SheerObesity.

Or he's just responding the same way anyone would to a person like "Nerf Stormborn" who whips out titles like " anti-science people" while trying to change the subject and twist words.

Also I am confused, where did I say evolution is untrue? lol

Gotta be a troll. Nobody could have that poor a level of reading comprehension.

so you're saying that I am the same as somebody that says evolution is untrue?

Yep, step for step, and antivaxxers and so on. You:

* Trot out your line of Ken Hams/Lord Monktons, while never citing anybody with any actual relevant expertise, educationally and professionally, and expect us to just ignore the huge body of accomplished scientists and scientific institutions who have given their professional verification on the work, trying to paint this dishonest picture that the science wasn't settled by anybody who is relevant long ago.
* Insist that there's a conspiracy in science and make vague insinuations about there 'being money (or silly idealism) in it' (despite there being a s***load of money and ideological frothing behind creationism and climate science rejection)
* Constantly post misleading "gotchya" moments about the conspiracy in science (evolutionary biologists faking skulls, climate scientists faking data, etc).
* Post s***** videos and say "see, evolution/climate science proven false by my super awesome uneducated science-doing skills"
* Cite lists of engineers and people from completely unrelated fields as 'scientists who disagree'
* Have your line up of terribad ultra-conservative politicians making comments about how we didn't evolve from monkeys, about how carbon dioxide is invisible and odourless lawl, and so on.
* Are being led around by the nose by the same 'thinktanks' who previously worked for the tobacco industry to use these same tactics against research which showed smoking caused cancer, now employed by the mining CEOs.

etc. etc. etc.

What did trog just say motherf*****s?

That's a pretty elitist point of view^

I welcome all newcomers.

I think that you should consider banning some of these recent emigrés.

Most of the GA people have already left. I will leave if I am not wanted here. Apologies for any brain damage suffered from reading the above 'debate.'

anyway regarding Julie Bishop / cabinet women thing I reckon there is a difference between equity and equality. Just because you have the opportunity to achieve equal representation doesn't mean you are entitled to equal representation no matter what.

The new cabinet having only one woman is a result of the fact that there are few women of experience in the LNP. That's simply because the LNP as a party doesn't appeal to educated women, whereas Labor and The Greens clearly do.

I think we all know their aptitudes, abilities and interests are different for physiological reasons.

Most of it is a Tony Abbott quote koopz, I was being sarcastic.

Tony Abbott has announced the sacking of three public service chiefs and a major shake-up of the federal bureaucracy in the first few hours since being sworn in as Prime Minister.

Dr Don Russell lost his job as head of the Department of Innovation, Industry Science and Research; Blair Comley was the head of the Resources, Energy and Tourism Department; and Andrew Metcalfe, a former Immigration Department chief, has been sacked as head of the Agriculture Department.

Those left-wing nutcases at the ABC have done it again: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-18/dunlop-the-intelligent-design-of-tony-abbotts-new-cabinet/4965704

Their particular bugbears are evolution and the science of climate change, and so it is no surprise that the new cabinet no longer has a minister for climate change, or that the science portfolio, originally introduced into Australian cabinets in 1931, is being watered down with industry and education. (And don't be at all surprised to see a push for "intelligent design" to be included in school curriculums.)

Regular Australians who read Murdoch drivel seriously have no idea what they're in for. Be prepared for a full on transformation of the nation in to the southern United States.

Must be another Murdoch Media conspiracy.

Oh that image couldn't get any more easily photoshoppable.

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/9/18/1379483062620/Cash-010.jpg

O wow, Abbot in charge of Women's issues portfolio, even a staunch Liberal supporter can see the fail in that.

'I care about the Womens, look I'm even in charge of their portfolio, because women need a strong male steering the ship'


^^ Waiting for a comment like that from Mr. Abott lol

Oh I get, I see it now. Julie Bishop has been stroking Tony's ego all along and put him up to this. He will make such a fool of himself this time that he will be forced to resign and Julie (notice the similarity to Julia) will stab him in the back and steal his job. It's all suddenly become so clear!

I welcome all newcomers.

Well now you don't really do you, you're a LNP stop the boats stalwart.

"Abbort sworn in, bureaucrats sacked" Cashing cheques and breaking necks. This is what i like to see. Time to end the public service waste. Come on baby let the good times roll.

I bet you recorded the whole ceremony for playback while you Tickle your Taco

Science, research, innovation, tourism, the impending climate change crisis... areas of small importance.A handful of brown people arriving to seek a better life... STOP THE BOATS.LNP, the Got its Priorities Right Government.

The government must be abandoning Science, research, innovation, tourism etc if they don't have a minister and 5,000 bureaucrats allocated to it!

I disagree, I wouldn't put anything past those people.

Seriously, I will not be the least bit surprised if intelligent design gets snuck in by someone somewhere. I'm not saying Tony Abbott will champion intelligent design in schools or something insane, but some underhanded support for teachers proselytizing is not much of a stretch. The desire of many religious people to convert others should not be underestimated.

There's no indication of them going that way currently, so I'm not worried about that.

Abbott is a devout Catholic and Catholic leaders often believe in forms of intelligent design (Cardinal Pell being one, who seems to be close to Abbott). Annoyingly they call it 'evolution', but then describe intelligent design (creator-driven evolution, instead of probability, which is basically really all that evolution is about), but eh, there's been no indications that way. Then again, Abbott was crazy enough to put himself in as the person responsible for women's issues, so I guess it wouldn't be completely shocking to me at this point, given the strong anti-science bent in their party.

Seems he is a traditional Catholic on this, rejects evolution for an intelligent design version: http://www.saltshakers.org.au/component/content/article/49-christianity-and-politics/592-tony-abbott

"I don't say that evolution is a complete and entirely satisfactory scientific explanation of the origin of man."

Along with flustered avoidance of other questions on the issue.

They have made some rumblings about getting control of the school syllabus as well, to take it away from leftists or somesuch.
http://www.politifact.com.au/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/sep/05/tony-abbott/what-flavour-history-will-australian-children-stud/