monotonehell wrote:Everyone should read this if they still think the Lib's plan saves us money. It really doesn't.
So just to recap, the very left wing Melbourne University, has an article on "election watch" shouting the virtues of the NBN. They even have a photo of the very professor from the NBN TV adds in their article. So we now know which university the lovely professor who simply cant exist without his NBN in the TV add comes from. So much for being unbiased. So then where do they get their costing figures from? The NBNCO? The same Co that is way behind schedule and WAY over budget and under their take up target in areas connected even before this gets off the ground?
OK sarcasm aside, just as a lay person, who really wants to get on board with this, lets look at their facts. So the figure (even in this article is now $44BIL) I thought it was $35 BIL last year. Ok so what's a few billion you say. That increase in cost is over 1 year and it has not even got off the ground yet. How can we possibly know it will stop at $44BIL. Ah but even at $100BIL it would be worth it eh, because as is constantly pointed out, UPLOAD speeds are as important as DOWNLOAD. Yeh I get that, but aren't the upload and download speeds identical under both systems in wireless and satellite devices, and given that is what the vast majority of people are connected to, via smart phones and Ipads I am still at a loss to understand why every home will be connected. People do not plug their tablets into a wall jack at home to browse.
Also, organisations such as unis, hospitals and the like that require the added capacity of cable to premises will be able to connect to cable under both systems, as it should be.
Should K Rudd win the next election, this will become a very big rope around the governments neck as far as bad publicity (poor execution of the project, cost over runs, delays and poor uptake), and financial drain. Just watch as he backflips and scales down or delays aspect of this project as well, once it becomes political poison.