Sorry for the wrong posts, folks. New here and still learning the ropes.

And Shadow Minister, I readily admit to having no economic credentials. If that disqualifies me from holding opinions in the matter, fine. It would be a great pity to waste the time of so highly qualified and erudite a person as yourself, and I'm sure that your valuable professional advice would be far better offered on another thread. Leave this one to us unqualified yobbos to amuse ourselves with.

I get it now, thanks Beelzebub.

>>Leave this one to us unqualified yobbos to amuse ourselves with.<<

I quite understand that it is important to be allowed to write complete rubbish on a topic that you know nothing about, simply because it is an opinion that you hold.

Fair enough, no question. You are indeed so entitled.

That doesn't however give you leave to be quite so dismissive of the opinions of people who do, actually, know a little bit about that which they write.

Enjoy your sandpit of ignorance.

Two issues currently in the media illustrate the need for views such as those presented by pelican:

1. The sale of QR National.
2. The National Broadband Network.

Back in the days when Queensland was a part of the Australian Commonwealth, Queensland Rail was an asset of the common wealth, owned collectively by all Australian citizens, and run for the benefit of society as a whole. No-one would claim that it was run at maximum efficiency, even were it possible to measure that; but it was very effective, provided essential transport services that were cost-effective for individuals and businesses, and stable, long-term employment for thousands of skilled Australian workers, all of which required a minimum of bureaucratic tinkering or 'economic restructuring'.

On 3rd December 2001 the Queensland Consitution 2001 came into being, and Queensland then became an independent sovereign State with a Corporate Government known as the Brigalow Corporation, registered with the US Securities and Exchange Commission under No. 0001244818. At the same time, Common Law was replaced by Civil and Statute Law, under which all Crown land, assets and infrastructure on that land including schools, hospitals, roads and so on became responsiblilities of the Ministers of the State, and assets of the Brigalow Corporation. This is how politicians, who previously were the appointed guardians of Commonwealth assets, but never legally OWNED them, have been able to sell Australian public property into foreign private ownership. See http://www.abpac-australia.net for details of this.

The QR network is no longer confined to Queensland, but spans the continent. As well as its public and industrial transport services, it it a crucial part of Australia's national defence infrastructure. Should this country ever need to defend itself against either external or internal threats, the national rail network would need to be commandeered to ensure rapid and reliable transport of defence materiel across the continent. This cannot be given any realistic economic value. By selling it, especially into foreign ownership, Australia is seriously, if not criminally jeopardising its future defence capabilities at a time when stringent economic constraints are being enforced on the Defence Department.

.. cont >

As valid as the above arguments might be, they are, in fact, somewhat dated. The major threats that Australia faces in the foreseeable future are not military, but social, economic, and political. No country would be so stupid as to mount a military invasion of Australia in the foreseeable future. Not only is it logistically impossible, it is strategically foolish. At present, our neighbours in the region are primarily interested in our mineral and agricultural wealth, and these are far easier to acquire by political and financial means. A process of slow social impoverishment and national decay is a far more certain and permanent way of obtaining whatever is required than a military offensive. In the modern world, business is a form of warfare; Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" is required reading in many modern business curricula. By selling crucial national assets to foreign competitors whose social and political situations are far more stressful and under far greater threat from flood, famine, and other natural disasters, Australia is jeopardizing its future sovereignty, independence, and social stability.

That the above considerations apply to the proposed NBN are even more obvious, given the importance of national and international communications to both business and the military. Like the railways, it should be a public asset, not the financial plaything of wealthy investors and speculators. According to all news media, we are currently experiencing perhaps the largest economic boom of all time. If the wealth thus acquired cannot be used to create and acquire fixed, long-term assets, then not only will it have been wasted, but the opportunity thus squandered will never recur and the common wealth will be impoverished to the point of penury.

These are the issues that politicians and the media refuse to discuss. All vow alliegance to the doctrines of corporate globalization and economic efficiency at the behest of their masters in the world of international finance and Big Business. It's time for Australian's to wake up to this, else they will slowly but surely be reduced to poverty and servitude.

How can we ever achieve efficiency if we constantly go for more ?

Beelze, there are indeed good reasons to flog off QR rail. All
this was discussed in the media 20 years or so ago, but perhaps
you are too young to remember.

Firstly, the Queensland Govt needs the money. The state is up
to its eyeballs in debt, so something has to go. Qld residents
will benefit, saving interest on 6 billion $ or so.

Secondly, rather then your feared overseas rich speculators buying
QR rail, more likely it will be mostly both local and international
pension funds. They want a regular and steady income for workers
pensions, fair enough. I don't think that they are going to
threaten you too much. Even you might land up owning a share, through
your super fund.

There are good reasons why many of these companies were sold.
When Govt owned Qantas and Telstra, what we had were fat and lazy
Govt monopolies. Sure the staff benefitted from their cushy jobs,
but what about the rest of us?

Some of us do in fact live in the real, global world, where our
products and services need to compete. We can't do it if our input
costs are outrageous, to satisfy the whimms of a few mollycoddled
employees.

Fact is that when they were Govt owned, communication costs in
Australia were astronomical and airline costs were astronomical.
So things had to change.

Today you at least have some competition in the telephone sector.
If you don't like your landline, you have a number of competivive
mobile operators, consumers benefit. The same with internet
services, unlike the 9$ an hour that a Govt owned Telstra used
to charge me, in 1995.

At times it cost nearly as much to fly from Perth to London, as
Perth to Sydney. Why? Lack of competition. Govt employees
seem to think they are entitled to a job for life and don't like
annoying customers interfere too much with their cushy lifestyle.

So flog em off I say. The the rest of you should compete in the same world
that the rest of us have to.