 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: NBN & FTA's: The Coalition is lying to the public again |  |
|
Project on track from a leaked report:
http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/government-it/leaked-nbn-co-corporate-plan-shows-project-on-track-20130925-hv1tg.html
Not only do "we" get an inferior product but the coalition criticism is shown to be baloney, exaggerated & less than consistent with the truth.
Additionally, by privatising aspects of it then the new players will cherry pick the most profitable parts & leave the rest to the tax payer. In effect privatise profit, socialise loss.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman
Last edited by watt price tully on Tue Jan 12, 2016 10:34 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
|
|
 |
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| What is in effect privatise profit socialise loss like in there? |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
What, so there are no WMDs in Iraq after all? George W. Abbott was lying? But Malcolm Cheney is a serious businessman; he knows what's best for us.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: Re: NBN: how the Coalition is lying to the public, again | |
|
Their internal report may show they're on track but Turnbull is completely acting responsibly IMO by asking for a full review. Data can be manipulated in many ways to make performance look better than it actually is, without lying.
It would be irresponsible for any incoming government to just accept whatever figures are handed to them without wanting to drill down into detail and get real facts.
As far as the part privatisation, or allowing competition, I philosophically agree with that, but will reserve judgement until I see the detail. If you want to get opinion on how well government owned monopoly service providers work, ask people what they thought (think) of Telecom / telstra.
I used to work there so my opinion is a bit different to most.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: Re: NBN: how the Coalition is lying to the public, again | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: |
Their internal report may show they're on track but Turnbull is completely acting responsibly IMO by asking for a full review. Data can be manipulated in many ways to make performance look better than it actually is, without lying.
It would be irresponsible for any incoming government to just accept whatever figures are handed to them without wanting to drill down into detail and get real facts.
........... |
You weren't watching Yes Minister long enough Stui. You only have a review when you know the outcome in advance.
Getting Ziggy Switkowski to run it is like asking Clive Palmer's opinion on Coal Mine expansion when you're after an "objective" response  
It's baloney being sold by the smoothest salesman of the lot.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: Re: NBN: how the Coalition is lying to the public, again | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: |
Their internal report may show they're on track but Turnbull is completely acting responsibly IMO by asking for a full review. Data can be manipulated in many ways to make performance look better than it actually is, without lying.
It would be irresponsible for any incoming government to just accept whatever figures are handed to them without wanting to drill down into detail and get real facts. |
How ridiculous; if you don't believe one government's review, how will another government's review help settle your mind? The fact is you haven't researched the first one properly and you won't research the second one properly; you're just barracking for anything the team does and you'll accept whatever they dish out to you.
Anyone who has done anything in business anywhere at any scale knows that under a microscope waste can be found; this is a fraudulent exercise aimed at propping up the investments of TurnBS's greasy Telstra and Big Media mates who despise competition and free markets, and don't give a stuff about middle income jobs going forward.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: Re: NBN: how the Coalition is lying to the public, again | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: |
Their internal report may show they're on track but Turnbull is completely acting responsibly IMO by asking for a full review. Data can be manipulated in many ways to make performance look better than it actually is, without lying.
It would be irresponsible for any incoming government to just accept whatever figures are handed to them without wanting to drill down into detail and get real facts.
........... |
You weren't watching Yes Minister long enough Stui. You only have a review when you know the outcome in advance.
Getting Ziggy Switkowski to run it is like asking Clive Palmer's opinion on Coal Mine expansion when you're after an "objective" response
It's baloney being sold by the smoothest salesman of the lot. |
Maybe, maybe not. I know when Sol started at Telstra the level of detail he required of who did what and how it was done was a massive culture change. I also know how my own CEO will continually get my team to run data for him to compare against the data he's given to check things. Ptiddy's attempted insults and rants I deem typical and ignore them, but you would know exactly how data can be manipulated.
Yeah, I've commissioned reviews before knowing the outcome I expected in advance, but every time the data I got by independent sources confirmed my suspicions. If they had of been different I would have gone back to basics.
I get all the venting and angst by those who are upset that Abbott got in, all I'm asking for is a bit of perspective on some of the issues. I reiterate, there's nothing wrong with doing a review before making decisions. Some things are obvious low hanging fruit to be changed, others need an understanding of the current state first.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^Yes, but why does the ability to manipulate data apply to one report and not the other? And if you have not studied the matter yourself, how do you know Turnbull is justified in commissioning another report? And will you compare both reports properly when you get them, or just believe what you're told?
Or is this like the conservative support for the Iraq War--any old ad hoc argument to buy time so the bastards can implement plans conservatives believe are in their personal interest but are too ashamed to admit?
Stop hiding behind feigned offense and concede the obvious; Turnbull is applying the usual two-tier Glib approach to the nation. In order to redistribute capital upwards someone has to pay, and if that means serving technological roast beef to the elite and mouldy crusts to the peasants, damaging national productivity for short-term gains along the way, they'll do it every single time.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: Re: NBN: how the Coalition is lying to the public, again | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: |
Their internal report may show they're on track but Turnbull is completely acting responsibly IMO by asking for a full review. Data can be manipulated in many ways to make performance look better than it actually is, without lying.
It would be irresponsible for any incoming government to just accept whatever figures are handed to them without wanting to drill down into detail and get real facts.
........... |
You weren't watching Yes Minister long enough Stui. You only have a review when you know the outcome in advance.
Getting Ziggy Switkowski to run it is like asking Clive Palmer's opinion on Coal Mine expansion when you're after an "objective" response
It's baloney being sold by the smoothest salesman of the lot. |
Maybe, maybe not. I know when Sol started at Telstra the level of detail he required of who did what and how it was done was a massive culture change. I also know how my own CEO will continually get my team to run data for him to compare against the data he's given to check things. Ptiddy's attempted insults and rants I deem typical and ignore them, but you would know exactly how data can be manipulated.
Yeah, I've commissioned reviews before knowing the outcome I expected in advance, but every time the data I got by independent sources confirmed my suspicions. If they had of been different I would have gone back to basics.
I get all the venting and angst by those who are upset that Abbott got in, all I'm asking for is a bit of perspective on some of the issues. ........ |
Despite me having a dig at the Mad Misogynist Miners Monk, it's the policies (or lack thereof) that causes consternation. THe NBN policy is a case in point. For almost all communications / broadband experts in the area, the libs case was a singularly inferior product: Not just the product but the Libs exaggerated the costs of the NBN for their model which will not "future proof" "us" & not place "us" in a position to transition to newer model of industry. It actively operates against those in remote locations due to the cherry picking & cream skimming that ill occur, i.e. privatise the profit & socialise the costs.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: Re: NBN: how the Coalition is lying to the public, again | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: |
Despite me having a dig at the Mad Misogynist Miners Monk, it's the policies (or lack thereof) that causes consternation. THe NBN policy is a case in point. For almost all communications / broadband experts in the area, the libs case was a singularly inferior product: Not just the product but the Libs exaggerated the costs of the NBN for their model which will not "future proof" "us" & not place "us" in a position to transition to newer model of industry. It actively operates against those in remote locations due to the cherry picking & cream skimming that ill occur, i.e. privatise the profit & socialise the costs. |
I can't argue about the libs product, the labor model is undoubtedly superior from a technology perspective, I'm only arguing about the concept that a new boss should ask questions about the data rather than just accepting what they're handed.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: Re: NBN: how the Coalition is lying to the public, again | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: |
Despite me having a dig at the Mad Misogynist Miners Monk, it's the policies (or lack thereof) that causes consternation. THe NBN policy is a case in point. For almost all communications / broadband experts in the area, the libs case was a singularly inferior product: Not just the product but the Libs exaggerated the costs of the NBN for their model which will not "future proof" "us" & not place "us" in a position to transition to newer model of industry. It actively operates against those in remote locations due to the cherry picking & cream skimming that ill occur, i.e. privatise the profit & socialise the costs. |
I can't argue about the libs product, the labor model is undoubtedly superior from a technology perspective, I'm only arguing about the concept that a new boss should ask questions about the data rather than just accepting what they're handed. |
Then PTID's comments above are most apt here. That is:
"Yes, but why does the ability to manipulate data apply to one report and not the other? And if you have not studied the matter yourself, how do you know Turnbull is justified in commissioning another report? ....."
That is the notion that somehow Smooth Mal is going to have a value free/neutral/objective assessment seems so trusting. Trust me, it ain't!!
You've assumed that the report currently in & noted in the article can be manipulated but somehow this won't apply to Mal's material (review).
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
Culprit 
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The winner will be Telstra who has just announced more sackings. 
Turdbull and Co are in Murdoch's pocket who the NBN will be in direct competition. They have been told to screw it big time in return for his continued support. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: Re: NBN: how the Coalition is lying to the public, again | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: |
Despite me having a dig at the Mad Misogynist Miners Monk, it's the policies (or lack thereof) that causes consternation. THe NBN policy is a case in point. For almost all communications / broadband experts in the area, the libs case was a singularly inferior product: Not just the product but the Libs exaggerated the costs of the NBN for their model which will not "future proof" "us" & not place "us" in a position to transition to newer model of industry. It actively operates against those in remote locations due to the cherry picking & cream skimming that ill occur, i.e. privatise the profit & socialise the costs. |
I can't argue about the libs product, the labor model is undoubtedly superior from a technology perspective, I'm only arguing about the concept that a new boss should ask questions about the data rather than just accepting what they're handed. |
Then PTID's comments above are most apt here. That is:
"Yes, but why does the ability to manipulate data apply to one report and not the other? And if you have not studied the matter yourself, how do you know Turnbull is justified in commissioning another report? ....."
That is the notion that somehow Smooth Mal is going to have a value free/neutral/objective assessment seems so trusting. Trust me, it ain't!!
You've assumed that the report currently in & noted in the article can be manipulated but somehow this won't apply to Mal's material (review). |
No, Ptiddy's comments are as usual, irrelevant.
I know all data can be manipulated and I don't assume that Mal's material won't be. You don't have to assume the original data is wrong, you just should always check, ideally by getting as much raw data as possible before it's put through the filters.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: Re: NBN: how the Coalition is lying to the public, again | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: |
Despite me having a dig at the Mad Misogynist Miners Monk, it's the policies (or lack thereof) that causes consternation. THe NBN policy is a case in point. For almost all communications / broadband experts in the area, the libs case was a singularly inferior product: Not just the product but the Libs exaggerated the costs of the NBN for their model which will not "future proof" "us" & not place "us" in a position to transition to newer model of industry. It actively operates against those in remote locations due to the cherry picking & cream skimming that ill occur, i.e. privatise the profit & socialise the costs. |
I can't argue about the libs product, the labor model is undoubtedly superior from a technology perspective, I'm only arguing about the concept that a new boss should ask questions about the data rather than just accepting what they're handed. |
Then PTID's comments above are most apt here. That is:
"Yes, but why does the ability to manipulate data apply to one report and not the other? And if you have not studied the matter yourself, how do you know Turnbull is justified in commissioning another report? ....."
That is the notion that somehow Smooth Mal is going to have a value free/neutral/objective assessment seems so trusting. Trust me, it ain't!!
You've assumed that the report currently in & noted in the article can be manipulated but somehow this won't apply to Mal's material (review). |
No, Ptiddy's comments are as usual, irrelevant.
I know all data can be manipulated and I don't assume that Mal's material won't be. You don't have to assume the original data is wrong, you just should always check, ideally by getting as much raw data as possible before it's put through the filters. |
Doesn't wash I'm afraid. PTID was spot on. PTID's comments are wholly relevant. You're actually in furious agreement with him but don't want to acknowldegde it - but who's surprised.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^
Hah, no, as usual we argue different things because he takes things off on imaginary tangents and I CBF responding to his ramblings.
My premise was as is that it's good governance to not just accept data you're handed when you take control over an organisation, but to seek to do some forensic analysis. It may prove the original data right, or not. The point is you should do it.
It's like paying to get a house or car inspected before you buy it even if the owner presents papers to say it's been done. You get your own. The whole argument over each side being equally able to manipulate the info is utterly irrelevant to the point.
Mate, I'm starting to worry about you, you're agreeing with Ptiddy too much to be healthy.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
