atw: Re: National Broadband Network and empathy
- From: LEWINGTON Warren <Warren_LEWINGTON@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 15:03:22 +1000
And another thing quite prescient to our discussions today:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/20/2988801.htm
Regards
Warren Lewington
Technical Writer
Compliance and Enforcement Branch
________________________________
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Geoffrey Marnell
Sent: Friday, 20 August 2010 2:26 PM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: National Broadband Network and empathy
Hi Mark,
Re you comment "surely you have also seen a lot of sloth in the hidden recesses
of government departments?". I said that I had, in the first paragraph of my
posting.
Do you really want private-sector evolution regardless of civil and ethical
outcomes? It sounds like you want to leave everything to markets. Even
economists have largely abandoned that idea. The GFC was largely the result of
unfettered evolution of capital markets. Without government intervention, where
might we all be now?
Cheers
Geoffrey Marnell
Principal Consultant
Abelard Consulting Pty Ltd
T: +61 3 9596 3456
F: +61 3 9596 3625
W: www.abelard.com.au<http://www.abelard.com.au/>
Skype: geoffrey.marnell
________________________________
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Nebauer
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 12:44 PM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: National Broadband Network and empathy
Hi Geoffrey,
Interesting thoughts on private/public sectors Geoffrey but I'm still inclined
to think that the private sector is at least subject to the laws of evolution -
it's all about survival of the fittest. This is what should keep the private
sector lean and mean. If private enterprises are getting sluggish then
something is wrong - they are not operating in the real world, probably because
of monopoly-type environments and I think electricity, transport and water
suppliers could fit into this category. There is no such dynamic in the public
sector which makes me surprised to hear your observations - surely you have
also seen a lot of sloth in the hidden recesses of government departments?
Mark
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Geoffrey Marnell
Sent: Friday, 20 August 2010 10:26 AM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: National Broadband Network and empathy
Hello Rod,
It's good to see the passion return to this list, but can I ask a favour. For
the edification of all those still interested in this thread, can you provide
some solid, empirical evidence that the private sector is always more efficient
than the public sector. Here is my anecdotal evidence to the contrary. I have,
over many years, been employed by both sectors and have contracted to both
sectors. While inefficiency (encompassing waste, mismanagement and general
ineptitude) has been fairly evenly spread across both sectors, the instances of
greatest inefficiency I has witnessed were in the private sector. Two segments
in particular stand out: start-ups (who seem to think that money grows on
trees) and the large, long-standing, highly profitable behemoths (lulled by
blinding complacency into thinking that they must be doing the best they can).
Nothing came close in the public sector.
Secondly, do you think that the private sector can always provide services more
cheaply than the public sector? I mentioned yesterday that governments can fund
their activities more cheaply than private companies, and they are not driven
by shareholder appetite for profits and ever-increasing profit growth. But
let's look at some examples. The anti-government government of Jeff Kennett
privatised electricity in Victoria, assuring voters that this would lower
electricity prices. Of course, the exact opposite occurred. Likewise water
distribution. And take a look at Melbourne's privatised public transport
system. Grossly inefficient, more and more expensive and incapable of retaining
private-sector interest without the government tipping in a few hundred million
dollars every year. So here's a case where necessary infrastructure is of no
interest to the private sector unless it gets a government grant. (Or perhaps
you consider a railway system not necessary infrastructure at all.)
To my mind, reliance on the private sector is a recipe for the Hobbesian jungle.
Cheers
Geoffrey Marnell
Principal Consultant
Abelard Consulting Pty Ltd
T: +61 3 9596 3456
F: +61 3 9596 3625
W: www.abelard.com.au<http://www.abelard.com.au/>
Skype: geoffrey.marnell
________________________________
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rod Stuart
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 8:39 AM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: National Broadband Network and empathy
And the best way......no, the ONLY way to make life easier for the end user
(that's all of us) is to get government our of everyone's face. We're
over-governed, over-taxed, over-regulated, and on top of that INEFFICIENTLY
governed taxed and regulated.
On 19 August 2010 22:20, Anne Casey
<writan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:writan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
At 10:03 PM 18/08/2010, you wrote:
So what you are saying Anne is that the whole nation should have to cough up
just so that you can get broadband? Living away from infrastructure has its
price.
Actually, Bruce, you are wrong. I (deliberately) live close enough to the local
exchange to get ADSL2, according to Telstra - except the local copper is so
poor that I can only get unreliable ADSL. Telstra has no interest in fixing the
problem. It's not about what I am prepared to pay, but whether a private
company could be bothered.
I'll be generous though Anne, I'm happy to say "those using it when there is
copper nearby should pay for it" if that helps, but it still sounds like you
want the nation to pay for a safe, well-built, fully paved road to every farm
and outlying doorstep. Oh hang on, I still haven't read that you were willing
to pay for my road toll costs.
You didn't ask; you just assumed I'm only interested in my own welfare. I'm not
in favour of toll roads. On the other hand, I could say that the fact that
you're required to use a toll road is because you chose to live away from
infrastructure (heavy rail) - and you have to pay the price. I on the other
hand choose to live walking distance from a train station; and yet I would
support a rail extension to improve your access to public transport.
I've come to realise over the last couple of days that there is something I
look for in a technical writer, apart from the usual skills list - the ability
to empathise with end users; to some extent to want to make their lives easier.
Any thoughts?
Anne
--
Rod Stuart
6 Brickhill Drive
Dilston, TAS 7252, Australia
<rod.stuart@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:rod.stuart@xxxxxxxxx>>
M((040) 184 6575 V(03) 6312 5399
Before printing, please consider the environment.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachment to it are intended only to be
read or used by the named addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally
privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by
any mistaken transmission to you. The RTA is not responsible for any
unauthorised alterations to this e-mail or attachment to it. Views expressed in
this message are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the
views of the RTA. If you receive this e-mail in error, please immediately
delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy
or use any part of this e-mail if you are not the intended recipient.
Other related posts:
