The Rant-O-Matic

Maybe it’s the hangover talking; or the lack of sleep; or the fact that for some reason it’s absolutely fucking freezing in this house at the moment but it seems to be that this election and the campaign that lead up to it are exactly what the voting population of this country deserved.

From the lack of any policy to the barrage of negative attack ads to the completely forgetting that an election should be about what will happen as opposed to what has happened. All of it is entirely our fault and the result of last night’s election were exactly what we should have got.

In short; we got exactly what we had coming.

The only reason that we ended up in such a no-win situation is because we, the voting public, have been refusing to engage our brains enough to see what has been happening over the last 3 years. Instead we let the media run off and pursue their own agendas instead of merely being there to report the facts and ask the tough questions of both our government and the opposition. Instead of information we got week after week of banging on about the negative messages of both parties, a lot of the fear-mongering and a general level of discourse that centred around issues that would be more at home in the pages of Woman’s Day rather than our entire national media.

Our own sheer laziness is where we can rest the blame of the shameful institution that is our current parliamentary situation, Instead of demanding foresight we allowed ourselves to be scared by reports of the terrorist boat people and how they were going to overrun by turning up in their thousands every single day. Instead of forcing a discussion of policy we decided it was better to have a debate about the debate on having a debate.

Take a good look at yourself Australia. Take a long, hard look. This is your fault. Not Tony’s, not Julia’s. Yours. The parliament exists to serve the people, and this is what the people wanted. Live with it.

While the future of the National Broadband Network (NBN) has been talked about quite a bit over the last week or so of the election campaign, it still looks as though the government still doesn’t understand just why this project is of such national importance.

Even those technology evangelists, who’s voices really ought to be the ones that should be convincing the public at large about the benefits of the NBN, seem to be missing the point. They get caught up in the technical side and the technical merits of the NBN. Something that the average voter just doesn’t give two shits about.

To me, the problem seems to be that both the Labor party and the commentators seem to think that the majority of the voting public are surgeons, CEOs of large corporations or research scientists because it’s the benefits that those groups will receive from the NBN that seems to be getting most of the air time.

This argument makes it very easy for critics to attack the cost and style of the NBN program because its proponents fail, constantly, to address the immediate benefits that consumers will get from the network’s construction. They then make their second mistake, which is to fail to encourage people to think about what the NBN could be used for beyond what we currently consider “normal” internet use.

So, when the Coalition get up and say they can provide an incremental update on existing service levels for a fraction of the NBN’s $43billion price, then it becomes quite easy to see just how people that do not live and breathe the connected world that we do would be inclined to see the NBN as somewhat frivolous.

Making the case that the NBN has medical, business and educational benefits is all well and good, but he vast majority of the Australian population are not surgeons, CEOs or educators. With that in mind, you have to go about convincing Joe Public that he wants a fibre optic line from the world into his house. And that is the argument that no one is making.

What a lot of people who comment on this sort of thing seem to be forgetting is, that when it comes to government spending, we, the Australian people, are complete and utter tight-wads unless we can see what the direct benefit to us will be from any government project.

This becomes more important when opponents of the plan point, quite rightly too, that the big benefit talking-points, like remote surgical procedures, are already taking place in hospitals around the country. Even this morning, during an announcement about the commencement of the second stage of construction in Townsville, Julia Gillard was out trumpeting more of the health benefits that the NBN will deliver. Again, she is not giving the majority of voters a reason for supporting the construction of this important program.

What the supporters of the NBN should be doing is heavily promoting the reasons that an average, wage-earning family would have for the NBN. And that argument, simply, is entertainment.

For most people, the benefits of the NBN aren’t about talking to your relatives overseas or getting in touch with a doctor at stupid AM. The benefits for those people come from how the NBN is pretty much going to replace all the current ways that they consume entertainment as we head into the future.

We need to be telling these people that the NBN is what is going to replace the current TV and radio broadcasts when they enjoy today which will all, eventually, cease transmission (my guess is around 20 years, but that’s another discussion) in the near future. We need to be making the argument that if the NBN does not reach completion then the Australia people are not going to be able to easily access the amount and variety of entertainment programming that they do now.

While a lot of people promoting the NBN from the “we are the internet people” perspective have no interest in sport. They have to realise that generally Australia has a massive interest in sport. The NBN gives those people a chance to be able to indulge their love of a sport in ways that have never been available to them before. The least of which is freeing them from the shackles that the FTA broadcasters have been keeping them in for years now.

We should be telling that the NBN will have the potential to offer any movie, streamed, in high definition, straight to their TV at the drop of a hat. We should be telling them that on-demand TV programming, best served over the NBN, is the only way they they’re going to have true choice and freedom of content when it comes to sitting down in front of the telly at the end of a long day at work. This is what people are wanting. This is what we should be telling them the NBN is the only way they’re going to get it.

Finally, can we stop banging on about the idea of telecommuting as another great benefit of the NBN? Personally, I have a healthy separation between my work and my home. I have a policy of not letting the problems of one affect the other. I don’t take my personal problems into the office and I certainly don’t take work home with me at the end of the day. I’m sure that I’m not alone in that though. What I hate is this constant suggesting that telecommuting is something that could all move to just because we’re going to a technology that makes it possible. There’s a lot to be said for physical, along side mental, separation between work and rest of one’s life.

We (being the internet loving people) all agree that the NBN is a vital project that is key to bringing our nation into the digital first world. But not everyone thinks like us. Not everyone understands just what the NBN is capable of delivering. We have to look beyond what is usually trumpeted as the reasons for such a project and instead focus on the things that actually matter to those many people that exist outside our usual circle of thinking. If we do that then we have nothing to worry about in terms of the NBN being canceled by the next government. If we do this then popular opinion will make sure that we get what we need.

This week I find myself confronted by something of a quandary. A quandary brought about by the significantly larger than expected income tax refund I’m about to receive.

To start with, I am largely sick of my iPhone 3G[S]. I contribute this feeling to a combination of both the device itself and my carrier, Optus. These days I pretty much only use my iPhone for Twitter when I’m out and about and to listen to podcasts when I’m in the car. There’s possibly the sending of less than 100 SMS messages in a month and less than 5 phone made using the “phone” functions (Yes, iPhones have them too). Not to mention that every time I actually have to rely on it having enough battery to last any reasonable amount of time, it just fails. So, generally it’s just “meh”.

But, I want the internet everywhere…you know, because that’s the sort of person I am.

What I discovered, over lunch on Friday, is that it’s a rather expensive exercise if I were to cancel by current Optus contract and pick-up a prepaid Telstra SIM. We’re talking about $950 expensive.

What you can probably see, because you’re all awfully intelligent people, is that I could get a 3G iPad for $800 then I’d have at least 6 months of Telstra service before I’d catch up to the cost of switching the iPhone.

The problem here, however, is that I do not particularly want an iPad. There’s a couple of reasons for this. Firstly, I do want out of the Apple iTunes environment. Although I realise that Android still has their own problems, the direction that Apple is taking with iTunes is something that I do not agree with and am no longer willing to subject myself too. Secondly, if I was going to carry something around everywhere I’d want it to fit in my pocket.

Further to that, if I bought an iPad I’d probably end up carrying it around in a bag or some sort. But if I was going to start carrying a bad everywhere, I’d just put my MacBook Pro in it with a 3G USB modem and use that instead. After all, it’s a proper laptop with a physical keyboard that I’m comfortable with doing large amounts of typing on.

So, smart people, what do I do?

So, has GetUp’s federal court victory to allow online voter enrolling just made it easier for people to commit electoral fraud? I’d be willing to bed that it has, you know. At least one some level.

Not just because you couldn’t do it under the old system (of course you could, I’m certainly not saying anything to the contrary), but by allowing enrolment to occur online has made the process so much simpler.

Think about it. Pretty much every 17 year old worth their salt can get their hands on a fake ID and – from what I’ve seen in the three elections I’ve voted in so far – bouncers outside of pubs check Ids harder than any electoral worker.

So it’s certainly not going to be hard to come up with a convincing enough set of identities to visit a couple of polling booths on election day, is it now?

At least the old analog system required a reasonable amount of effort and was a fairly time consuming process.

But this also has further, far more disturbing, consequences for our electoral system, in my view.

One you enable on part of the system to shift from it’s previous analog base to an online one, how long is it going to be before the cries of “we can enrol online, why can’t we vote there too?” are going to star echoing across the country.

Seriously, you really want that? How about no.

This isn’t just about the technical side of it, or whether it’s right or wrong for our society to be going down this path. This is about “the internet” still on it’s high-horse about how fucking awesome they are that they use this medium constantly and how everyone who doesn’t think like them is a complete, backwards, incestuous moron.

The problem this self-righteous group has is that they’re still the minority. The vast minority. And being a condescending, patronising bunch of pricks certainly isn’t going to help them turn people to their line of thinking.

It’s an attitude that I’m condemned before, but one that doesn’t seem to be abating. Which is sad because, like anything, it has the potential to be irreversibly damaging of the consequences of actions are not properly considered.

There are some things in this country that we’re just going to have to accept. We’re going to have to accept that every summer the southern half of the country is going to be on fire while the northern half drowns. We’re going to have to accept that we’re never going to live down the image of Australia portrayed in the Crocodile Dundee movies.

Most importantly, however, we’re going to have to accept that there’s a lot of things that we would like the government to build for us that we simply cannot afford to have. Rationalising the decision not to build something that seems important with economics does seem like something of a cop out, but there’s a couple of very good reasons as to why it’s an important consideration when it comes to government spending.

The first problem seems to be the disconnect with the money governments spend and just where it comes from. I’m the first to admit that I dislike the amount of income tax I pay each year but I also realise that without doing that then there’s no way for the government to provide facilities and services that we come to rely on.

So, if you want the government to spend billions upon billions of dollars on a new project, that has never been placed in a budget paper for funding then you have to realise that this money needs to come from somewhere. And for a government that means raising taxation levels.

Secondly what people seem to forget is that businesses exist to make money and to provide a return to shareholders for the investment in the money making enterprise. So in order for them to want to deliver a service they have to see that it is going to provide a reasonable rate of return within a given period of time. This rate of return is always higher and wanted quicker than what any government would be looking for from their investment.

So, what happens when a business builds and controls an infrastructure project? Look no further than the Sydney Airport rail link. Hideously expensive to use, hopelessly under-patronised and accomplished none of it’s original goals about reducing congestion and parking. All-in-all it has been a pretty dismal failure and something of a waste of time and effort.

So. Infrastructure. What are our problems with it and how does this relate back to how they’re funded?

Funny you should ask.

Given one of the major issues in the current election is immigration, it’s somewhat ironic that our current lack of advanced infrastructure projects is linked intrinsically to our population and, more specifically, where that population is located.

In this country we have a lifestyle that is remarkably different from that of many other major international cities. Our smaller population and large total landmass means that we do not come close to having the population densities of some other major international centres. The nature of our country and our urban development has created a style of living that is unique in the world.

There are, however, some drawbacks. The main one being that having such a spread out population means that it’s very hard to build effective mass transit systems that can provide an excellent service for an affordable cost. There just aren’t enough people paying taxes to be able to able to fund the construction of expensive systems with public money and if you let a private company make that investment instead then the cost to use it would be astronomical.

We pay a price for our (generally) high standard of living and (frankly) reasonable costs of living. That price is that we do not have a large tax base that can easily absorb the cost of large investments and we don’t have the volume of traffic to make it a viable business if it were to be done privately.

This is why we’re never going to have a high-speed east coast rail link between Melbourne and Sydney. It’s why Newcastle is never going to get anything more than the current bus system.

It sucks. It really does. But think about it. We still pay some of the highest taxation levels in the developed world; do you want to pay more? Do you want to have to take out a second mortgage just to catch the train to Melbourne? Australia is a great place to live. But that lifestyle comes at a cost. And this has to be realised.