Wow NYT leaving out some important info there. One, it was a public-private partnership and us Aussies were never going to get anything for free. Two, the major reason for issues has been that our...
The only comparable project is in Australia,...
Wow NYT leaving out some important info there. One, it was a public-private partnership and us Aussies were never going to get anything for free. Two, the major reason for issues has been that our centre-right (Liberal) government fucked with the program after it was started by our centrist government (Labor).
I live in one of the more affluent inner-city areas of Sydney, which is itself one of the richest and most expensive cities on earth, and my internet is shocking. In Melbounre I had the NBN service which was OK, but in Sydney my area doesnt have it. I can sit down and try to use streaming services but I can't because the thumbnails won't even load. That's just entertainment problems though, what really annoys me is that the terrible internet hampers my ability to build an internet-based business at home.
God I wish we had good public internet infrastructure and services, but instead we here have the opportunity to be price-guoged for shit services.
I'm frustrated by this. I don't think it's a bad policy - quite the opposite, the core concept of treating internet infrastructure as a public utility is a sensible one. I'm frustrated because it...
I'm frustrated by this. I don't think it's a bad policy - quite the opposite, the core concept of treating internet infrastructure as a public utility is a sensible one. I'm frustrated because it just isn't where the debate needs to be ahead of an election this crucial.
The Conservative government's policies over the last decade have been directly responsible for hundreds of thousands of avoidable deaths and enormous unnecessary suffering. They are now doing everything in their power to undermine and privatise the NHS. For everybody's sake, Labour need to fucking win. That doesn't mean compromising on sensible policies, it doesn't mean abandoning things like nationalised internet, but it does mean controlling the narrative in the run up to the election and making clear what people are really fighting for here.
I don't want to be discussing the economic merits of relative minutiae like this when there's so much more on the line.
I agree with everything else in your post, but not this. Labour don't need to win, the Tories need to lose, which isn't quite the same thing. Personally I think that a Lab/Lib/SNP/others coalition...
For everybody's sake, Labour need to fucking win.
I agree with everything else in your post, but not this. Labour don't need to win, the Tories need to lose, which isn't quite the same thing. Personally I think that a Lab/Lib/SNP/others coalition would be a more representative government than Labour alone, despite my personal politics aligning best with Labour out of the main players (cut me and I bleed Green but I accept they're a lost cause for the time being), which might go some way to repairing the terrible image politics has in so many people's minds. Also it's probably the only way we'd get to even talk about proportional representation.
That would absolutely be my perfect outcome as well, but since Swinson ruled out working with Corbyn I just don't see it happening. If anything I worry about the Lib Dems splitting the anti-Tory...
That would absolutely be my perfect outcome as well, but since Swinson ruled out working with Corbyn I just don't see it happening. If anything I worry about the Lib Dems splitting the anti-Tory vote and letting them through thanks to our shitty FPTP system. So for me, when I'm making a post specifically about pragmatism and strong messaging, it has to be a Labour win - not because I agree with them on everything, but because I think they're our best and only hope.
For what it's worth, I actually generally vote Green; I'm in one of the safest Labour seats in the country, so I have the dubious privilege of voting my conscience safe in the knowledge that it won't make a scrap of difference.
Wow NYT leaving out some important info there. One, it was a public-private partnership and us Aussies were never going to get anything for free. Two, the major reason for issues has been that our centre-right (Liberal) government fucked with the program after it was started by our centrist government (Labor).
I live in one of the more affluent inner-city areas of Sydney, which is itself one of the richest and most expensive cities on earth, and my internet is shocking. In Melbounre I had the NBN service which was OK, but in Sydney my area doesnt have it. I can sit down and try to use streaming services but I can't because the thumbnails won't even load. That's just entertainment problems though, what really annoys me is that the terrible internet hampers my ability to build an internet-based business at home.
God I wish we had good public internet infrastructure and services, but instead we here have the opportunity to be price-guoged for shit services.
I'm frustrated by this. I don't think it's a bad policy - quite the opposite, the core concept of treating internet infrastructure as a public utility is a sensible one. I'm frustrated because it just isn't where the debate needs to be ahead of an election this crucial.
The Conservative government's policies over the last decade have been directly responsible for hundreds of thousands of avoidable deaths and enormous unnecessary suffering. They are now doing everything in their power to undermine and privatise the NHS. For everybody's sake, Labour need to fucking win. That doesn't mean compromising on sensible policies, it doesn't mean abandoning things like nationalised internet, but it does mean controlling the narrative in the run up to the election and making clear what people are really fighting for here.
I don't want to be discussing the economic merits of relative minutiae like this when there's so much more on the line.
I agree with everything else in your post, but not this. Labour don't need to win, the Tories need to lose, which isn't quite the same thing. Personally I think that a Lab/Lib/SNP/others coalition would be a more representative government than Labour alone, despite my personal politics aligning best with Labour out of the main players (cut me and I bleed Green but I accept they're a lost cause for the time being), which might go some way to repairing the terrible image politics has in so many people's minds. Also it's probably the only way we'd get to even talk about proportional representation.
That would absolutely be my perfect outcome as well, but since Swinson ruled out working with Corbyn I just don't see it happening. If anything I worry about the Lib Dems splitting the anti-Tory vote and letting them through thanks to our shitty FPTP system. So for me, when I'm making a post specifically about pragmatism and strong messaging, it has to be a Labour win - not because I agree with them on everything, but because I think they're our best and only hope.
For what it's worth, I actually generally vote Green; I'm in one of the safest Labour seats in the country, so I have the dubious privilege of voting my conscience safe in the knowledge that it won't make a scrap of difference.