dutchroll Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Gillard was worse than Abbott. Actually they were as bad as each other. Most people hated Gillard pretty much solely for the carbon tax and because she formed an alliance with the Greens. The rest was personal. Many conservative voting pilots I know, when specifically asked what they disliked about Gillard, stated those two things (but were pretty short on elaborating in any detail), then went on to explain how big her **se was, how unattractive she was, and how her hairdresser boyfriend must be a p**f. No, I am not joking or exaggerating. That was their contribution to the policy debate. The latter three points took up most of the conversation time when Gillard's name was mentioned. I actually agreed that the carbon tax was a bad policy idea, but I never got to explain why in most conversations as the topic so quickly turned to her "fat **se". I do actually get a bit despondent over the apparent intellect of some of my colleagues sometimes, but I know I'm not alone there.
cscotthendry Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Most people hated Gillard pretty much solely for the carbon tax and because she formed an alliance with the Greens. The rest was personal. Many conservative voting pilots I know, when specifically asked what they disliked about Gillard, stated those two things (but were pretty short on elaborating in any detail), then went on to explain how big her **se was, how unattractive she was, and how her hairdresser boyfriend must be a p**f. No, I am not joking or exaggerating. That was their contribution to the policy debate. The latter three points took up most of the conversation time when Gillard's name was mentioned. I actually agreed that the carbon tax was a bad policy idea, but I never got to explain why in most conversations as the topic so quickly turned to her "fat **se". I do actually get a bit despondent over the apparent intellect of some of my colleagues sometimes, but I know I'm not alone there. Dutch: Most Conservatives I've spoken to are like that. Their loyalty to their party is like their loyalty to their footy team. It is tribal and personal. "You are with us or against us" there are no shades of grey for Conservatives. If you are one of "Them" and not one of "Us" then you are to be hated and destroyed. My own sister is like this and once wrote to me that "Mom should have aborted you".
Marty_d Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 It's always interesting that labor voters will defend criminals by trying to divert attention, union members /ALP voters must be a special kind of stupid , they get screwed royally by the scum bosses and frantically defend them Yep, it's far more stupid to vote for the "scum bosses" of the unions than vote for a party that's bought and paid for by big business. If you read my post properly MM I was calling for balance by saying both major parties are owned by business of one sort or another. The only way you get away from this is to ban lobbying and remove all political donations. The Koch brothers (owners of Coca-Cola) are pumping $1 BILLION into campaigning for the Republican party in the US. Do you really think businesses make an investment like that without expecting something in return? In 2013/14 Labor received $78m in donations. Libs received $125m and Nats $12m, so LNP total $137m. Do you reckon that extra $59m came from chook raffles at the local RSL, or businesses backing the horse they think will lower their tax obligations (or continue to ignore the current loopholes)?
fly_tornado Posted September 14, 2015 Author Posted September 14, 2015 conservatives or bigots as they are also known as, hate women.
gareth lacey Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 I am a conservative , and i love women ! now all labour has to do is get rid of scum like shorten and they may have a better chance someday(tongue in cheek) cheers gareth
fly_tornado Posted September 14, 2015 Author Posted September 14, 2015 abbott has 2 women in his cabinet/front bench/seniour positions and both voted to oust him last night
Marty_d Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 That's a bold statement, Marty.Not disputing what you're saying, but he's got a bit of competition for that title. I remember well Bill McMahon, as well as some more recent ones. I'd have to toss a coin. Perhaps I should amend that to "Worst prime minister that I've experienced as an adult". The prime ministers in my adult life were Hawke, Keating, Howard, Rudd, Gillard, Rudd, Abbott. Obviously I can't speak about those before.
dazza 38 Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Sorry fellas but there are too many crooks in Labor, they will never get my vote. Liberal hasn't been getting my vote either of late. The Greens ? Never . Doesn't leave me with much. But I do like the policies of some of the other parties. At the end of the day my vote will not change anything, I am in a Gold Coast seat which is in the Liberal heart land. It has always been a Liberal seat and by a vast majority.
fly_tornado Posted September 14, 2015 Author Posted September 14, 2015 vote for pauline dazza, you know you want to
dazza 38 Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Perhaps I should amend that to "Worst prime minister that I've experienced as an adult" which goes Hawke, Keating, Howard, Rudd, Gillard, Rudd, Abbott. Obviously I can't speak about those before. Keating ? Lol he is the joker who said " this is the recession we had to have", he had no idea imo. But each to their own.
dazza 38 Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 vote for pauline dazza, you know you want to I did vote for her when I was in the Air Force at Amberley. The first time she was elected. She tells it how she sees it. The Libs lead by the muppet Howard had it in for her because she said what other people thought, which wasn't politically correct.
Marty_d Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Pauline is like Lambie - she's a joke, but a true representation of part of the population.
gareth lacey Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Bill shorten and his union thugs are all corrupt,he will kill all incentive in this country if he gets in power ,when will people wake up , labor is not good for the country and has dragged us down so many times hawke,keating,crudd,julia , what a mess they got us into, ,pollies are just that,but at least libs have a track record of getting us out of the labor induced shxxt cheers gareth
Marty_d Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 No, the libs have a track record of blaming everything wrong with their own government on the "financial mess Labor left us". The mind-blowing thing is that there's still people out there who believe it. There's now been 2 years of LNP government. Every economic indicator in the country is worse than when Labor was in. Howard presided over the biggest resources boom in the country and squandered it on tax cuts and middle-class welfare instead of a sovereign wealth fund. Wayne Swan was treasurer during the worst financial crisis in 70 years and brought Australia through with flying colours. Yet somehow there's still this belief among rusted-on Libs that fiscal responsibility is the sole domain of the LNP. Unfathomable.
Guest Andys@coffs Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Everyone including us was handed a live grenade in the NBN , by our former two fearless leaders...Its hardly fair to blame the libs when that mess explodes... The real problem is Labour never should have started it in the first place, they should have planned it , done a cost benefit analysis and they would have realised back then that mobile data speed and ADSL2+ incentives would have been significantly cheaper and produced much higher productivity per $...it defies reality to run Fibre to every household in a nation as population sparse as Australia... I have maintained LAN's and WAN's with Fibre and yes they are fast, but they are also extremely fragile and expensive to maintain. I wrote to Oakshott when he proposed jumping in bed with Gillard to tell him the NBN would be a disastrous cost blowout and would be superseded by the need for mobile data before it was built...needless to say he had bigger things on his mind and did not reply... Optical Fibre works fantastic in locations with massive high speed data needs and high node or peer density, but it is woeful in areas of low node or peer density. Its expensive to maintain and it is fragile, especially the transceivers on each end which are very sensitive and prone to failure. Had labour done even a weeks homework before launching the NBN, they would have realised it would be a disaster in many remote areas. Sorry I don't see it that way and my IT experience tells me otherwise. The Copper in the ground in my area is only 10 years old but it was shagged due to a splicing solution Telstra used that had a gell filled cap that over time turned mildly acidic and caused the very corrosion it was specifically put in place to protect against..... The only solution was a complete retermination from exchange to house and no one was ever going to pay for that so about every 3 to 4 months I would get a failing ADSL connection which the T man would fix by swapping around pairs until he found one that worked...of sorts.... So given the choice of fibre or copper I'm immensely happy that I now have fibre to the home, only time will tell as it naturally degrades as to whether that is a good thing or not.....So far (18 months) not a single issue that I can put down to the NBN (my ISP is a different story though) NBN Backbone is Nextgen Networks who I used, in business as our high speed WAN carrier (complemented by lowerspeed (but similar priced) Telstra where Nextgen didn't have POP's for their fibre backbone) in a large 7000+person national Company in every state in Australia. Nextgen Networks City based dark fibre, where we provided the optical transceivers , and their national VPLS service where they provided a lit service were spectacularly reliable with outages only occurring to my knowledge when tradies/accidents resulted in cut fibres etc...... Optical fibre doesn't ever damage transceivers in the similar way that induced voltages in copper do when nearby lightning strike or some other electrical event occurs.......If you've had issues with transceivers then best you choose a better quality supplier.....rarely saw cisco transceivers fail....in fact the GBIC's that did fail were mostly Ethernet ones..... If I get that type of reliability for my home service I will be well pleased! Andy P.S Don't believe for one moment that crap about wireless being a solution to cover the vast majority of the Australian population........ Most household NBN solutions get access to say between 200Gb and 500Gb per month for the $100 per month mark.....In wireless that same $100 might buy you 10Gb.......Technical restraints, and the cost of the spectrum are the reasons for that huge costs delta.......I use the vast majority of my monthly quota...if forced to go wireless then streaming videos etc would all disappear and the dinosaurs who really control government policy (WRT to killing the intended NBN under prev gov) would be back in control again...come on down the +++$100 per month foxtel pricing etc...
DrZoos Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Andy Im sure i dont need to tell you, but Coffs Harbour is not remote...Fibre works well in areas like Coffs Harbour, where it is pathetic is in areas of much lower population /node/peer density... Areas of high density justify high quality transceivers with high quality protective environments...the lower the density...the less you can justify quality of transceivers and its supporting environment...this is when the maintenance costs and issues become exponential Given the choice of copper of fibre, you would have to be an idiot to pick copper...thats not the issue..the issue is as a nation is it a justifiable expense to pay somewhere around $40B-$60B to have fibre to every home when 90% don't even utilise the capabilities that copper can provide..had it been incentivised to upgrade.. Yes im well aware of the pair issues in the pits...used to deal with them personally and professionally. But they can be overcome at a fraction fo the price of a full network replacement, in a fraction of the time and they could have provided more than sufficient speed for almost the entire general populations needs... Right now i am on ADSL2+ we have 4 people streaming netflix simultaneously and sometimes on ipads at the same time ...it works fine... this is my point... a slight upgrade of the copper network could have achieved blisteringly fast results in terms of bandwidth and time frames...and possibly at a fraction fo the cost of the NBN...with the $30-$50B left over we could have put in a bullet train from Brisbane to Adelaide via Syd and Melb to free up the skies for us RAAus pilots Could $10B or $20B have achieved a better result where Fibre was used when needed and not when it wasn't...that we will never know because it was never considered Anyhow lets not lose sight of the real issue here....Labour waste
willedoo Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Keating ? Lol he is the joker who said " this is the recession we had to have", he had no idea imo. But each to their own. Dazza, on that subject, I'd highly recommend journalist George Megalogenis's book 'The Longest Decade'. The title is in reference to the breaking of Australia's traditional 10 year boom and bust cycle. It deals jointly with Paul Keating and John Howard in reference to the economy, and is very good reading. Cheers, Willie.
fly_tornado Posted September 15, 2015 Author Posted September 15, 2015 Andy Im sure i dont need to tell you, but Coffs Harbour is not remote...Fibre works well in areas like Coffs Harbour, where it is pathetic is in areas of much lower population /node/peer density... Areas of high density justify high quality transceivers with high quality protective environments...the lower the density...the less you can justify quality of transceivers and its supporting environment...this is when the maintenance costs and issues become exponential Given the choice of copper of fibre, you would have to be an idiot to pick copper...thats not the issue..the issue is as a nation is it a justifiable expense to pay somewhere around $40B-$60B to have fibre to every home when 90% don't even utilise the capabilities that copper can provide..had it been incentivised to upgrade.. Yes im well aware of the pair issues in the pits...used to deal with them personally and professionally. But they can be overcome at a fraction fo the price of a full network replacement, in a fraction of the time and they could have provided more than sufficient speed for almost the entire general populations needs... Right now i am on ADSL2+ we have 4 people streaming netflix simultaneously and sometimes on ipads at the same time ...it works fine... this is my point... a slight upgrade of the copper network could have achieved blisteringly fast results in terms of bandwidth and time frames...and possibly at a fraction fo the cost of the NBN...with the $30-$50B left over we could have put in a bullet train from Brisbane to Adelaide via Syd and Melb to free up the skies for us RAAus pilots Could $10B or $20B have achieved a better result where Fibre was used when needed and not when it wasn't...that we will never know because it was never considered As you increase the number and speed of ADSL based services in a node the speed and quality drops off. as the copper ages the lines become more unstable. the coalitions FTTN NBN is restricted to 12Mb till all the services are converted to FTTN FTTP is the standard as you get 100years out of the infrastructure
Guest Deskpilot1 Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 I don't normally get involved in political debates as it's a total waste of time and effort. Yes, I do vote but for which party is my business. This thread has now turned into a 'discussion' on who was the best or worst PM we've had recently so let me ask, who, within our parliamentary system, do you think would make a good PM and why, excluding Abbott and Turnbull obviously. My choice...................Nick Zenerphon (spelling!) Down to earth, speaks for the people, thinks for the people and not interested in lining his own nest or pockets. His policies I don't know but they're bound to be better thought out than any of the other w****rs near the top of the tree at present.
M61A1 Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Surely this country has bigger problems than fast internet........
fly_tornado Posted September 15, 2015 Author Posted September 15, 2015 No sign of Tony, its been over 14 hours, how long can it take to write a concession speech?
fly_tornado Posted September 15, 2015 Author Posted September 15, 2015 Surely this country has bigger problems than fast internet........ how do you build a competitive economy without it?
willedoo Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 DrZoos, I live in a rural area but am lucky to have the exchange 800 metres away, so have a good copper based broadband connection. The only problem I ever have with the copper is that of the 500 metre property line, about 150 metres is not encased in conduit and is vulnerable to lightning strike. Luckily it only happens every few years. The original Labor Government NBN plan had me a bit concerned, as I thought it would be fibre down the street and wireless to the property. Wireless had me a bit worried because of a heavy tree canopy - often I have to walk around a bit to get good mobile reception. So I don't know whether I would have gone from a good connection on copper to an unreliable wireless one under the original NBN. Cheers, Willie.
M61A1 Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 how do you build a competitive economy without it? Didn't realise we relied so heavily on the porn industry.....Check YouTube.....the Internet is for porn.
Marty_d Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 I don't normally get involved in political debates as it's a total waste of time and effort. Yes, I do vote but for which party is my business. This thread has now turned into a 'discussion' on who was the best or worst PM we've had recently so let me ask, who, within our parliamentary system, do you think would make a good PM and why, excluding Abbott and Turnbull obviously.My choice...................Nick Zenerphon (spelling!) Down to earth, speaks for the people, thinks for the people and not interested in lining his own nest or pockets. His policies I don't know but they're bound to be better thought out than any of the other w****rs near the top of the tree at present. Nick Xenophon is my favourite politician. Not sure you can have a PM without a party though.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now