Tristan,
Though i agree to a degree with much you have to say i think the general lean of your article is bias and has little subjectivity.
By writing such an article you leave yourself wide open to people like shadow minister and their ignorant right wing crap. Labor have done some good things such as act quickly to the GFC and place investment into infrastructure, they initiated some tax reform and have managed to keep the economy stable. The NBN is a magnificent project with the real vision we expect from labor and health reform has potential though under done. Unfortunately most of these positives have been undone by some real clangers. The stimulas was successful but failed with the batts disaster and an inability to sell the BER properly or help people understand that costs were going to rise with such a program due to industry pressures, state administrations and greed. Helped by radio jocks that play to the lowest common denominator much of the good work has come undone.
In the end the choice is between the mad monk and big red, not much of a choice but when i consider that the lib's will do as they say and put us back to surplus and pay off the debt quickly i must consider at what cost. Then you look at labor and wonder if they can manage to reform the debt as they say. The biggest plus labor has and again didn't sell is Julia and the dumping of Rudd. In this act they have a second chance to show us they can do it right, Rudd was clearly not using team work and the hope is Julia will use the available tallent or do we go to Abbott and the Lib's with the sure collapse of health reform, education spending and any hope of genuine reform to anything except the selling off of the kitchen sink so they can brag about their surplus.

The Liberals are now saying they will work towards a $6.2 billion surplus - doubling the promised surplus of the ALP. (New annoucement just today - before this article was published)

But what does this mean at the end of the day? Prudent government pursue the right mix of stimulus, investment and restraint at the right time.

Simply saying 'our surplus is larger than yours' is really nowhere at the end of the day.

Too big a surplus could have a deflationary effect; and could occur in a context which sees insufficient investment in the infrastructure and services upon which future productivity, prosperity and quality of life depend.

So - As opposed to Tim Colebatch's assumptions - quoted in this article - the Libs are now promising a larger surplus. But whether they can DELIVER it is another issue entirely.

And finally - the Libs game of 'one-upsmanship' on a projected surplus is nowhere outside the full context; the appropriate economic mix - stimulus, investment, restraint - at the right time, targeted properly, and of the required quantity...

Given the Libs' inclination towards a 'scorched earth' policy here - and what it would mean, it's no wonder Abbott is running from a proper economic debate.

Re: my last post.

There was a typo. It should have read:

"(New annoucement just today - AFTER this article was published)"

that is: The Lib annoucement on their project surplus was annouced AFTER this article was published.

Issues: the proposed envisaged cuts to health, jobs/employment, police services, educational services and every aspect of our lives given the disgraceful waste of capital LABOR instigated and fuelled during their short term.

Capital that NOW has to be paid by all Australians in addition to the high costs of food prices, utilities fuel clothing and other items that are not caused by choice in many situations, not caused by State governance - remember, what goes around comes around, and a country in a deficit of Billions will IMPACT greatly upon all Australians.

If the Libs do their job 'right' again as they did last time under Howard, they will be able to stamp out the DEBT in a relatively short period of time, all as a result of Labor's lack of competency, lack of vision, and hyperactive and impulsive behaviour.

As Australians, under the Liberal Leadership, we may just be the recipients of enjoying the fruits again of a country with lower costs of living, families not struggling this time next year.

Tristan,

The term you used was inferior technology. In engineering this would only be the case if the technology was more expensive and delivered less.

A Ferrari has superior technology to a Ford Falcon, but unless you are looking at driving at 300kmph the additional expense does not deliver any benefits.

The thread,

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10838

Clearly shows that there is no function that Julia Gillard has announced that the new NBN can do that the coalition's option can't, and that the coalition's option can be rolled out to the NBN format as required when the fiscal situation is better.

The NBN is more than we need now, at time when we can't afford it.

If I was flush with cash I would buy a Ferrari, presently I buy something fit for purpose.

As far as the BER is concerned, what you posted selectively ignores the genuine criticisms of the program. 2.7% lodged formal complaints against a "free gift" 60% of principles polled thought the money should have been spent on more important infrastructure, and that they did not get value for the money spent.

An important point is that with the best technology - approaching 100 times faster - you future-proof yourself.

What Abbott has offered will be a relatively short-term measure - and in relatively short order will have to be a replaced. That's why I think it's so ironic that Abbott's prime focus is 'waste, waste, waste. Abbott's broadband alone is thus a $6 billion waste.

Another issue is bandwidth - and current restrictions on internet usage.

How many people are sick of going past their download limit, and having their connection slowed ridiculously; or fined astronomical amounts?

With Labor's plan, bandwidth would be so great that there would be no current practical limit to bandwidth. So we could download or direct stream movies whenever we wanted. Or download computer games if that's what we were interested in. Or have live video conferencing; 'virtual lectures' and presentations: with tomorrow's technology, maybe even holograms.

The point being this technology should future proof us for a very long time. There's a lot we can do with this technology now - there will be even more in the future.