Producer,

Are you functionally illiterate, or just don't bother to read my posts.

To use small words:

1 Juliar's plan runs fiber to businesses, so does the coalition. Thus no difference.

2 Juliar's plan will get fiber to the households by 2020, the coalition will get vastly faster broadband there on average years quicker if it is a home business.

3 What small business in a low income area would need more than 50Mb/s?

If your small business in a low income area involve racks of internet servers worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, then they can get fiber to the premises for a few grand.

So there is no scenario where your "business" is not better off under the coalition's plan than Juliar's and Comrade Conjob.

ROUND 5

Shadow Minister – Just tell me how the low income consumer in Sydney is going to get their fibre connection.

Here we go:

If a small company in WA is able to offer a service that requires fibre to the home to a low income consumer in Sydney more efficiently, cheaper and offers a superior service that employs Australians rather than cheap offshore labour why shouldn’t they be able too. If the low income consumer in Sydney does not have fibre to the home because of Turnbull’s policy, how would Mr Rabbott’s mob resolve this?

This scenario is not an issue with the current model.

I will even start your answer:

The low income consumer in Sydney will get fibre from the node to their house under the Turnbull policy by ………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Producer,

Still lacking the literary skills to read my answer?

Still smarting from my demolition of your pathetic production line example?

Your posts are simply the most moronic I have seen in years. Any business gets a fiber connection exactly the same whether from Juliar's NBN or Abbott's.

The idiots guide to Fiber installation for PRODUCER.

Step 1 Apply for it

Step 2 The technicians put in the cable and connect it up.

Step 3 switch it on.

Any simpler and I would have to draw pictures

Round 6

Shadow Minister – Well done, we are getting there. I know you must be grumpy and tired. Now get a tight grip on that dummy.

Just to make sure we are on the same page, we are talking about the low income consumer in Sydney. I notice you haven’t been able to write “low income consumer” in any of your answers. You like to use the word “business” but to speed things up I’m going to pretend you really mean “low income consumer”. We wouldn’t want you weaselling out would we.

Just two itty bitty things you missed out

1. Under the Turnbull model, to who does low income consumer apply.
2. WHO PAYS FOR IT?

Neither of these questions apply to the current model because NBN installs fibre to the home.

Dear Producer,

If a small company in WA is able to offer a service that requires a copper connection to the home (such as an analogue phone service that allows one to hear the voices of their dear relatives overseas directly without being reduced to digital bits on the way) to a low income consumer in Sydney more efficiently, cheaper and offers a superior service that employs Australians rather than cheap offshore labour, why shouldn’t they be able to? If the low income consumer in Sydney does not have copper to the home because of Gillards’s policy, what else can they do other than fly overseas to hear their relatives face-to-face (oops, I forgot they are low-income and cannot afford a plane-ticket either, perhaps work on a cargo ship to finance the trip)?

Producer,

If any consumer who has had his network upgraded from 1Mb/s to 50Mb/s wants to upgrade to the more expensive NBN fiber 100Mb/s then he needs to pay for it.

The question I asked first that you have been continually weaselling out of is why does a low income consumer need 100Mb/s and why 50Mb/s cannot cover everything he needs.

If a low income consumer wants a bigger car who pays for it?