4 Corners focuses on internet censorship, 8.30 tonight

Tin (Cornerstone member):

Don't forget Abbott's other statement about the NBN - we're not getting it if he's the winner, so of the 2 party system, internet access is screwed either way.

muttzz (New user):

Indeed but while people argue over whether or not 43 billion's too much to pay for the NBN I think the filter is far too high a price to pay for the NBN.

Raindog (User):

Quoting Tin:
Don't forget Abbott's other statement about the NBN - we're not getting it if he's the winner

The statement was that Conroy's NBN would be stopped, that's not to say nothing will be done. Simply that an out of control spend will be halted. Do you really want an NBN that makes no economic sense? We want open and and affordable communications with equitable access across regions for vendors and consumers. Conroy wants an ALP filtered and managed monolith to off sell to Labor mates at the appropriate time. Anyone that doesn't see NBN an another Telstra in the making hasn't really understood the detail.

The Big Baboo (User):

I just love the phrase "If the Labor government is returned" Are there by chance still some people out there still willing to vote for this bunch of losers,not that the other mob is much better and who knows what they'll get up to. Methinks the best bet is either to abstain or vote Independent.
Who knows maybe we'll get a hung Parliament like Britain and then have some fun watching them play musical chairs for awhile.

Raindog (User):

Quoting The Big Baboo:
Methinks the best bet is either to abstain or ..........

Your first options suggest you lack the skills to be offering any sensible advice of a second.

The Big Baboo (User):

Unlike you "Raindog" who seem to like pissing in the wind,if I don't like the candidates which have been put up in my area.I just rock up at the polling booth,get my name crossed off the list and then walk straight out the door stopping at one of the volunteer stalls along the way for a snag with sauce which seems to be the only decent value you get from election day lately I reckon.

The Big Baboo (User):

I just love the phrase "If the Labor government is returned" Are there by chance still some people out there still willing to vote for this bunch of losers,not that the other mob is much better and who knows what they'll get up to. Methinks the best bet is either to abstain or vote Independent.
Who knows maybe we'll get a hung Parliament like Britain and then have some fun watching them play musical chairs for awhile.

AlexF (User):

Considering it was Liberals who cashed-in Telstra, who would otherwise now be mandated by government to establish NBN, I believe Australia got what it deserves, plus a government that's paralysed by its greedy, self-centred and short-term gain opportunistic citizens.
I hope Labor abandons NBN and any other freebies and act more like Liberals - screw everyone and everything Australia's got until nothing more to pillage. Rich deserve to get richer and poor can go and frak themselves - 'cause it's their own fault for being dumb losers.

muttzz (New user):

Quoting AlexF:
Considering it was Liberals who cashed-in Telstra, who would otherwise be mandated by government to establish NBN, I believe Australia got what it deserves.


Lucky for us if we do get a Liberal government, it'll be a different one than privatised Telecom.

Raindog (User):

Quoting AlexF:
Considering it was Liberals who cashed-in Telstra

Then again if you had wished to be accurate you'd have mentioned who were the architects and the ones who set that particular ball into motion. hmm?

Quoting AlexF:
'cause it's their own fault for being dumb losers'.

Is that the voice of experience speaking?

muttzz (New user):

Quoting Raindog:
Then again if you had wished to be accurate you'd have mentioned who were the architects and the ones who set that particular ball into motion. hmm?

Very good point. One which many who debate that the "Yay, Labor for NBN" side of things seem to be forgetting. Many of them solely blame the Libs for Telecom's sale.

It's interesting to read stuff like this (from '92).

"Nor is it in the least surprising that the government would again trample over Labor Party policy to achieve the sale of one of the country's biggest enterprises — that has been the hallmark of the Hawke-Keating Labor dynasty. According to a report in the November 13 Australian Financial Review, Brereton is working on a secret brief from Prime Minister Paul Keating to assess strategies for the sale."

And further

"No doubt, many customers think Telecom's operations in the past have left much to be desired from the point of view of service and cost. But privatisation will make phone services worse, not better. And in true economic rationalist style, it will place another major industry in the hands of private capitalists who will slash jobs and working conditions."

They couldn't of known how true their words would have been.

AlexF (User):

Oh, I get it, so, really its the ghost policies of previous Labor government that made Howard and Costello cash-in on the most important technological and the only telecommunication asset in Australia.
Damn, should have guessed it's Labor and their union mates who did it to us. Right!

muttzz (New user):

Quoting AlexF:
Oh, I get it, so, really its the ghost policies of previous Labor government that made Howard and Costello cash-in on the most important technological and the only telecommunication asset in Australia.


No, it's just likely that no matter who was in power the sell off would've happened.

AlexF (User):

Oh, ok, so, by investigating the viability of a selling Telstra, Labor is likely to have done it. Got it.
So, by same deduction, it's also likely Labor would have sold majority of Tesltra as we know Liberals did it and they would not have unbundled Telstra's infrastructure and services organisations because we know Liberals never did.

Raindog (User):

Quoting AlexF:
by investigating the viability

now that is spin!!!


Quoting AlexF:
So, by same deduction, it's also likely Labor would have sold majority of Tesltra

Did Keating sell the majority of CBA? Get your facts right.

AlexF (User):

Quoting Raindog:
Get your facts right.

Err.. what? Keating did sell Telstra? Or are these "facts" like woulda, coulda & shoulda?

muttzz (New user):

Quoting AlexF:
Err.. what? Keating did sell Telstra? Or are these "facts" like woulda, coulda & shoulda?


Looking at what the Keating government did do, it's a bit of a stretch to assert that they wouldn't of privatised Telstra under any circumstances. They were of the opinion it was OK to privatise other government owned properties, why not Telstra?

muttzz (New user):

Quoting AlexF:

AlexF Oh, ok, so, by investigating the viability of a selling Telstra, Labor is likely to have done it. Got it.

Looks like Janine Haines of the Democrats speaking early 1990 thought so as well.

"JANINE HAINES: And it's not going to make much difference to the country since both of them are deregulationists, although that hasn't worked. Both of them would sell off the farm as fast as possible. One might do it a little faster than the other. Both of them will privatise despite the fact that that will run up our private sector foreign debt even further, because people will have to borrow from overseas to afford to buy Telecom or whatever, and we're going to just get interest rates driven even higher."

traceyjames (New user):

All I hear are Adults determination to ensure that kids are not protected in this lawless society.
Lets ask the kids how they really feel, does it really make them happy that society adults, their should be protectors expose them to violence and violent sexual images every chance they get.
C'mon, kids these days find it hard to force a smile .
Let kids be kids, the last time I checked Adults were allowed to do anything they want even abuse kids mental health so who is looking out for the innocents of this world.

muttzz (New user):

Quoting traceyjames:
All I hear are Adults determination to ensure that kids are not protected in this lawless society.


You do realise that the proposed mandatory filter doesn't actually address material that a child should't be accessing right? If you want to protect children from material that's only "Refused Classification" then you're prepared to let them see material that they probably shouldn't be seeing (depending on age).

So should we filter the Internet at the level of a 5 year old? Perhaps a two year old. It's of course ridiculous to address the problem at the ISP level when what's needed is for a solution that's tailored to each child which only a parent can do and therefore needs to be done on a home by home level. If you feel that parents are too lazy to do this then you are focusing on the wrong area when considering an Australia wide, "one solution fits all" filter. Instead of requiring that the government filter everyone, parents should filter their children.