I answered your question. We force people to buy it because it makes it cheaper for everyone.
OMG OMG forced to buy it!!! Get over it. They force me to “buy” the powerlines outside my house. They force me to “buy” the roads outside my house. (last I checked, I couldn’t purchase a competing car-registration, or pay competitors taxes to build alternative roads).

Hell, when you have dirt roads they force you to pay the dirt-bitumen upgrade!.

Financially the NBN is a brilliant methodology to upgrade our telecommunication infrastructure, but it re-nationalises what was for a long, long time, an asset the Market lusted after. Naturally, after just getting to finally own it, after getting Honest Johnny to con the Australian people into selling them what they already owned, and implementing the extortion (that is exactly what it is) that always follows (but it is ok you know, it’s a profit) when a private monopoly occurs, to resolve this Market holding the Nation to ransom, the Government at the time looked for a way out of this impasse. It found one, but the Market saw it as anathema to its ideology that everything should be privately owned and sold (Capitalism).

So naturally, as the Liberal’s always seem to be rabidly extoll anything that is good for profit at the expense of everything else (when did they lose the way from Menzie’s vision and why he left the UAP?) as unfortunately they have become so predictably disposed to do, whilst blindly turning a blind eye to the lies (marketing campaign) that were all promise and never seem to actually become to be anything at all like what was promised in the end, they will look after the Interests that will profit from the system they themselves help to set up, which in turn will look after their financial position to have a nice fat cheque book to utilise at the next election to hold power. (Whew! Sorry for the long sentence)

Now, don’t get your knickers in a knot, Labor does the same but with the Unions, so I’ll defuse your indignation right now. *sigh*

So the argument, just like so many contentious issues that are argued these days, is all about Market forces demanding it be the dominant player in deciding the fate for Mankind (read this as YOU). So in the end, regardless of whatever the subject is, NBN, Global Warming or Corporate Welfare, in the end it is about who owns and controls the infrastructure on which you depend to live in this modern age when it comes to services that are most efficiently delivered by a natural monopoly (Yes, they want to own the Biosphere too). Private or Public? Personally, I’ll take Public, as in the end the profit comes back to me to provide something nice we can all use against someone else utilising it against me for their personal profiting leaving me with the mess to clean up after them. Yes, I know you love following people around and cleaning up their left over mess. You crave it.

So Tel, I know you don’t own your own home as debt is so bad to Universe will cease to exist if you do (or are you being a Troll and just hypocritical for fun) or do you discriminate financially saying Public can’t have debt, but Corporations can. Well why should a Corporation have the right to own property like a person when it is not a person? As you see, you’re arguing a cause that is something akin to a petulant sociopathic child demanding that they want it all to happen the way they want it to be. Their way, or no way! They are utilising years and years of human psychology amassed to great effect as a tool to gain their desires by getting gullible people to champion their cause in the social arena.

Feel gullible? Don’t worry, many are and we have all been to arrive where we are today. Don’t feel bad about it. But don’t be blind to it. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me thrice………….

Short term debt for long term gain and all debt + interest to be repaid. But of course you don’t believe they WILL make the money back….even AFTER complaining everybody is going to be forced onto it and therefore the revenue is guaranteed…

What was that about reading?….

I guess answering a simple question is a bit beyond your grasp.

let me explain it for you as logic appears to be difficult for you.

The government had decided to replace our current infrastructure with fibre to the premises. As a result, all those people currently using copper, will be moved to fibre. As there will be so many people using the fibre it will be cheaper than using the copper for a superior service.
How is that possible your brain just slowly registered? It’s ok to be confused, I’ll do my best to explain.
The company operating the network has been asked to make a 7% return, instead of 20%+ on its assets, is step one.
Step 2 is critical, they structure pricing in such a way that those that don’t want an upgrade from ADSL speeds, pay relatively less than those that want newer higher speeds.
That way, compared to ADSL many nbn plans look ‘cheaper’.
In addition, the savings from having built the network such that everyone must use it (volume savings, Luke cost co!) Means that everyone gets a better service, how? Well, when everyone pays the maintenance of only one network, instead of 2 or 3 seperate cable networks then only 1 set of technicians are required to maintain it, instead of every company with a network hiring 3 full sets of people to maintain it!

Finally, the corporate plan has outlined the estimates to explain all of this in more detail, all whilst omitting business and high volume corporate use almost entirely, which can only increase projected return. (certainly can’t make the network LESS viable having more customers right!)

hope this helps.

Seriously Tel, is that the BEST argument you an come up with?? Fibre IS 100 times better than copper. That is fact. It is also in most cases on the NBN CHEAPER than copper. That is also fact. The fact that people may or may not take an interest in their telecoms 2 months after it goes in is neither here nor there. They WILL when RSP’s ring them.

User pays, or beneficiary pays, is a pricing approach based on the idea that the most efficient allocation of resources occurs when consumers pay the full cost of the goods that they consume.

The NBN as a whole is not paid for by individual users. They pay for THEIR goods/services. You are imply being disingenuous and trying to twist its meaning. The NBN is providing services. The cost of those services is being paid for by the user. It is a user pays system.

The library simply went for a look in its collection, found the relevant standard and issued a statement on behalf of the government. They did not MAKE the standard nor do they need to. They looked it up. You were suggesting the library was not an accounting office, as in they were not qualified to make a standard They don’t, they just look it up, which they did.

I don’t really understand why issue you have with it. There are at least 3 people that oversee the collection who understand economics and finance. Go look it up.

Enough from me, Renai will be starting to see red.

Bye..

The NBN is a 10 year roll out and really apart from trial sites and a few initial areas, is yet to really kick in.

How many people paid to cross the harbour bridge before it was completed? Silly analogy… just as silly as suggesting the NBN should be making a motza immediately.

You know, I am even forced to stop at a red light… how dare they.

Seriously.

Right now, what it actually is, is not anywhere near paid for by the users.

My goodness I’m glad we are free to vote individually…..I tend to vote for a party’s policy….not whether 1 man is capable or not in economics….