Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 60695	2005-08-10 03:59:00	Cynical broadband conversation	jonp (7517)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
379957	2005-08-11 06:21:00	In the words of Prebble "Ive Been Thinking", and in the words of John Campbell....ponder this.... The present Labour Government is far to the right (IMHO) of any UK Conservative governement I had experience of since 1950. (That's not counting Thatchers government of which I had no first hand experience). Peoples perspectives these days have shifted considerably since Reganism/Thatcherism, so much so that any degree of social responsibility is now awarded a red flag :thumbs:	Terry Porritt (14)
379958	2005-08-11 07:11:00	In the words of Prebble "Ive Been Thinking", and in the words of John Campbell....ponder this.... The present Labour Government is far to the right (IMHO) of any UK Conservative government I had experience of since 1950. (That's not counting Thatchers government of which I had no first hand experience). Peoples perspectives these days have shifted considerably since Regan ism/Thatcher ism, so much so that any degree of social responsibility is now awarded a red flag :thumbs: I have to ask T.what you mean by social responsibility. A friend of mine just rang from Thailand,he has had 3 crowns fitted,total cost $4oo,here $3000.Now you tell me that somebody is not getting ripped off. That is allowing for difference in standard of living. That was just a little aside,pal just rang.	Cicero (40)
379959	2005-08-11 07:21:00	Boys, boys, boys... The fun part of this right & left & liberal & Uncle Tom Cobbley & All is that Telecom itself is such an anachronism. And it's built that way because politicians once thought they were doing us ALL a favour. Back in the days when that good old government department was privatised, nobody dreamed there'd be such a thing as broadband. It was the part of the Post Office which dealt with telephones. And the worry was that privatisation would mean we'd end up having to pay for LOCAL phone calls - like in Australia & much of the world - as well as tolls. And that was a real concern at a time when there were no mobile phones & only a few fairly basic computers. (Yes, Virginia, there was such a time. And it wasn't really all that long ago. Ask your parents...) So the government put in a safety valve called the Kiwi Share, which meant Telecom had to promise that local calling would remain free. In return, the government had to guarantee certain lines rights to ensure that didn't disadvantage Telecom in the open market. (And if I didn't have people chattering around me, I'd remember the details) But my point is that those who want everything opened up to all telecompanies equally now are the right-wingers who wanted privatisation back then. And they're also the left-wingers who opposed it back then. And they're the computer owners who didn't have one back then. And they're the mobile phone owners who didn't have one back then. So they may not even care now if local calls are charged..? But I'd like to know why nobody asks any politicians whether the Kiwi Share agreement still exists? And is that why they're dithering? Or is there another reason for helping to keep Telecom's share price up for investors? And if I knew that, I could decide whether to be right,left or liberal on the subject. Meanwhile, I find the anti-Telecom brigade is an amusing politically-diverse bunch of bedfellows.	Laura (43)
379960	2005-08-11 07:34:00	The fact is that when it was privatised,it wasn't done well.As I have said b4,like all these things,it impossible to think of all the ramifications.Having said that,I think it is only fare where a gov. dept. makes a cock up and virtuall gives them a printing press with $ plates,that the recipients of our largess should not expect it to go on forever.	Cicero (40)
379961	2005-08-11 08:38:00	....Meanwhile, I find the anti-Telecom brigade is an amusing politically-diverse bunch of bedfellows. Spot on Laura, that's why I've been doing all this ROFLING all over the place. As for the price of dental treatment in Thailand, it is quite illogical to compare the price there with the price here and try to relate it to concepts of social responsibility. I am surprised at you Cic. Firstly, the standards and norms in the two countries, procedures, professional registrations, qualifications, etc. will be quite different. But not withstanding any of that, it is quite valid to argue that prices can and maybe should, be set to a level that individual markets will stand. Competition will then weed out those who try to charge too much. That is called free enterprise. :) My idea of social responsibility includes concepts of the government curbing the excesses of free enterprise. Recall Enron, or even the 'Winebox' ? For those that try to drape the Red Flag around me, let me say that since the age of 18 I voted Conservative in the UK, and here, was a member of the National party for 4 years or so. I haven't changed that much, the political parties moved to the right of me :) Now few NZers really know what a socialist government is like, some accuse Helen of being a socialist dictator, man, you haven't lived. Harold Wilson and Jim Callaghan governments in the 1970s, now there was red socialism if you like. So red, it spawned contemporary TV programs like 'The Guardians' about how a right wing coup had outed the reds, and the country lived under martial law, and with the Royal Family moved to Canada. We had private right wing armies, General Walker springs to mind, set up to be ready if the reds took to the streets, there was a comedy TV program modelled on that too. There were 'flying pickets' that went around by the coach load to non striking building sites beating up people with baseball bats because they wouldn't join the strikes. When some of those flying pickets were jailed, we had calls from fellow traveller Labour MPs, like the KGB agent Tom Driberg and Tony Benn, to overturn the independent judiciary and set the thugs free. That was why the country eventually rebelled against socialism and voted for Maggie Thatcher, and how she was able to go so far to the right. I would have been much happier with Telecom being sold only to investors within New Zealand, I don't go along with the overseas sales of assets. That's a hiding to nothing by the end of the day for a miserably short term gain. I don't like the obscene salary payouts. How far Telecom should be forced to offer its services to 'competitors' I don't know. As I said, those that joyfully supported Rogernomics now have to live with the consequences. (Like those that were always gleefully rabbiting on about their shares and how much they had gone up by, during the 1980s every day over morning tea in the cafeteria ad nauseam. Until the crash that is. Then they were strangely silent :) ) As far as I'm concerned I took on Telecom and won the right to retain the ISP of my choice. It's open to anyone to take on Telecom for what they think is just. You have to stand up and be counted, that's why I dont hide behind a pseudonym.	Terry Porritt (14)
379962	2005-08-11 20:33:00	Jon, for years I put off getting broardband citing reasons like "its not worth it" or "I only download html pages anyway", but at an extra $15 per month than my dialup I would never go back . Do it now, you won't regret it (well you might if you go with telescum so I hear)	netchicken (4843)
379963	2005-08-11 21:15:00	dont hold your breath re political promises at election year........parties are known to do an about face right after elections at times and anyway anyone who believes a politician is a fool	drcspy (146)
379964	2005-08-11 22:38:00	dont hold your breath re political promises at election year . . . . . . . . parties are known to do an about face right after elections at times and anyway anyone who believes a politician is a fool Yes and isn't it appalling that we citizens just accept that? Helen Clark promised that rest home charges would be removed, before being elected in 1999 . The result? Silence . Until now with an election coming, the rules have been changed so that rest home fees still apply but above $150,000 assets . 6 years after the promise . John Tamahere excoriated those people who took golden handshakes . Until he secretly received one . Absolutely contemptible . And yet he remains a Labour darling . The icing on the Tamahere cake for me was when we learned that he and his wife abandoned their cats . Now I can forgive human foibles but cruelty to animals is in my experience an infallible signature of bad character . John Tamahere really revealed his true self in this heartless deed .	Winston001 (3612)
379965	2005-08-11 23:12:00	. . . Yes and isn't it appalling that we citizens just accept that? Helen Clark promised that rest home charges would be removed, before being elected in 1999 . The result? Silence . Until now with an election coming, the rules have been changed so that rest home fees still apply but above $150,000 assets . 6 years after the promise . . . . . Just not true, I'm very surprised and saddened out resident lawyer of all people should claim that to try to score a political point . The real truth is that Ruth Dyson, Associate Health Minister announced the rest home subsidy and asset testing changes that came into force on 1 july 2005, in Parliament on 2 April 2003 .	Terry Porritt (14)
379966	2005-08-11 23:20:00	I await the the reply to this. I am sure Winston would not deliberately misinform.	Cicero (40)
1 2 3 4 5