Australia - 'No Infrastructure'

[5wheelguy]

So I was watching some debate on Insight (I think) and the debate went into why Australia hasn't got the ability to create awesome things.

The old man said 'because Australia does not have the infrastructure.'

Ok, fine. Now tell me why nobody is building the infrastructure. It's 2017 guys. Australia is already 20 years behind. Oh yet somehow we can borrow HUGE machines from Germany to create underground tunnels.

Yet, we can't hire machines to help build the infrastructure? Maybe 'they' are. But I am yet to see proof of this. It seems like all this underground road stuff is just for private use.

These excuses are getting as old as the wrinkly old farts who perpetuate them. Maybe these old rich greedy pigs would like the public to take control, and start building the infrastructure?

Wow. Ok. We will. But don't expect us to give you old farts permission to benefit from ANY aspect of the new infrastructure. Ha ha!

[b0son]

Australia is more concerned with entitlements than innovation.

[zipping]

It's 10 years since Rudd won and the NBN still hasn't reached Northcote and Clifton Hill in inner city Melbourne. That project has sucked up something like 80 billion.

The Vic's signed up for a road connecting the Eastern Freeway with the West the left said no and Labor payed 1 billion not to build it.

The tunnels in Melbourne are public but user pays.

Which greedy pigs are you referring too?

[GASWAGON]

Originally Posted by zipping

It's 10 years since Rudd won and the NBN still hasn't reached Northcote and Clifton Hill in inner city Melbourne. That project has sucked up something like 80 billion.

The Vic's signed up for a road connecting the Eastern Freeway with the West the left said no and Labor payed 1 billion not to build it.

The tunnels in Melbourne are public but user pays.

Which greedy pigs are you referring too?

This infuriates me!

The East/West link needs to be made ASAP.

Peak hour traffic down the Greensborough end of the Ring Road is only 2 lanes and most mornings and nights its bumper to bumper way back for both direction. Also very hilly so VERY dangerous in wet weather.

And to get to the Eastlink (Ringwood) from Greensborough is all urban and 60-70km zones so it takes about half an hour in heavy traffic.

The Eastlink in huge (4 lanes and 100k limit all the way down to Frankston, but it is expensive).

Somethings gotta be done instead of blowing 80Billion on NBN that still is'nt finished!

[lra]

I got involved in a conversation / debate a couple of weeks ago, when some-one stated that the Dar – Adl rail freight is not as well used as anticipated, because anything destined for Qld or NSW has to go to Adl before it is shipped north again. That is why most of those state’s freight is done by road.
Now, I know that most of these rail lines are either closed or underused, but why can’t any politician, or investment company look at a map of Australia, and see that a rail line linking Tennant Creek > Mt Isa > Longreach > Charleville > Cunnamulla >Bourke > Sydney would not be that hard to do and achieve freight savings and improve access to a large part of the country which is ignored by the capital city orientated decision makers.

[LG17]

One of the problems has always been our small population compared to the cost/amount of infrastructure needed to traverse the country.
European countries have short distances and large populations which makes infrastructure much more feasible.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by LG17

One of the problems has always been our small population compared to the cost/amount of infrastructure needed to traverse the country.
European countries have short distances and large populations which makes infrastructure much more feasible.

THIS!

It's the cost per person available to pay for it. We can't afford nice things







.

[malazn mafia]

Originally Posted by LG17

One of the problems has always been our small population compared to the cost/amount of infrastructure needed to traverse the country.
European countries have short distances and large populations which makes infrastructure much more feasible.

The continent of Australia needs more than one country. The incompetent slugs in Canberra can't manage this country. Is there any avenue apart from a cultural revolution australia could be divided or sold off ?

[PooDog]

Originally Posted by malazn mafia

The continent of Australia needs more than one country. The incompetent slugs in Canberra can't manage this country. Is there any avenue apart from a cultural revolution australia could be divided or sold off ?

Hang on a minute ......the takeover of NZ is nearly complete and then you tell us your pollies are brain dead as well

Oh well Trump will save us ....oh and that pommy Sheila she has her finger on the pulse

[Vesper Martini]

108 tower in Melbourne is a 100 storey 900 million project currently in progess

[lra]

Originally Posted by Bevsta007

108 tower in Melbourne is a 100 storey 900 million project currently in progess

That may create jobs in Melbourne, ( and how many are foreign workers? ), but how does that improve the infrastructure for the benefit of the whole country.
Australia is too capital city focussed ..... my favorite TV news moment was few years ago, I was in Broome, "breaking news, a house in Toongabbie is on fire" ....... like who in Broome really cares about that.
Big news yesterday....... a bridge on Sydney's Westconnex (?) was completed, but many wooden road bridges in the upper Hunter Valley are in danger of falling down because of age and lack of maintenance. Wait till somebody gets killed as they collapse under a vehicle ?

[kaniSS]

Originally Posted by Bevsta007

108 tower in Melbourne is a 100 storey 900 million project currently in progess

How is that going to make my trip to work quicker?

[lra]

Further to my rant ........ (I could go on for many more ) ......the upper Hunter Valley, vineyards, coal mines, horse studs ......... worth $ 100 Millions to NSW and Aus in the way of exports and royalties. What do they get in return from both sides of the governing political parties ? Promises, BS and SFA.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by lra

Further to my rant ........ (I could go on for many more ) ......the upper Hunter Valley, vineyards, coal mines, horse studs ......... worth $ 100 Millions to NSW and Aus in the way of exports and royalties. What do they get in return from both sides of the governing political parties ? Promises, BS and SFA.

You're kidding right

You don't think vineyards, coal mines, horse studs haven't either been subsidised or are a tax rort for the owners. They've all taken their share from the public pot.

Though I do agree that the capital cities get too much attention and there isn't enough spent on developing regional areas.


.

[lra]

Originally Posted by Raptor

You don't think vineyards, coal mines, horse studs haven't either been subsidised or are a tax rort for the owners. .

Probably worded my comment wrong. I didn't mean the owners of the above, I meant the populace in general ....... as in what do we, the public in the area, get in infrastructure improvements, paid for by the export and royalties ......... Promises, BS and SFA.

[nuthin' fancy]

I think the true infrastructure failure is in new suburbs.

It is known by the authorities who approve new suburbs that existing infrastructure will need upgrading and new infrastructure will be required.

I don't understand why each new block sold isn't subject to, say, a $5,000 infrastructure contribution. Have it so it is payable at settlement of the block and the managing authority (could be local government or a specific state government department) turn up at settlement and collect the $5,000. Because the amount would be contained within the sale price on the contract, banks would lend on it as part of the value of the land rather than it having a significant effect on the amount required to be contributed by the buyer (and first home buyers often have very limited resources).

The government could then borrow the money to put in upgraded roads and public facilities and train line extensions (or light rail in anticipation of this) and whatever else is needed before people arrive. Government would fund this through borrowing (at less than 4% in the current market) and be guaranteed the return from the settlement of the sale of the land.

The current situation is one where the people move in to poor roads and then when there is so much traffic that the upgrade has to happen, already congested roads are rebuilt causing further disruption.

Time for more leadership from politicians to make it happen, instead of mindless politicking that simple gets in the of progress and good policy.

[pauljh74]

Originally Posted by nuthin' fancy

I think the true infrastructure failure is in new suburbs.

It is known by the authorities who approve new suburbs that existing infrastructure will need upgrading and new infrastructure will be required.

I don't understand why each new block sold isn't subject to, say, a $5,000 infrastructure contribution. Have it so it is payable at settlement of the block and the managing authority (could be local government or a specific state government department) turn up at settlement and collect the $5,000.

Heard of Stamp Duty? Usually more than $5k too

[au350hp]

Biggest problem this country has is no investments in science and tech. All the inventors sell any great idea to overseas investors so we lose any credit and profits for new design or ideas. We have a lot of very innovative people in this country but as long as we don't hold politicians accountable, NOTHING will change. We need to unite as a number and demand change like many other countries have successfully done in history. People here just put up with whatever is thrown at them. Change starts with one person/idea. People power always speaks the loudest and if we can join hands, we can really stick it up the powers that be. What will it take to make people do this?

[au350hp]

Any fool knows the way to reduce footprint and living costs is to build sustainable new suburbs with recycled water, solar storage batteries to store EVERY houses panels so when everyone returns home, they can call on their own grid for the peak. This is all so simple to organise, but as usual, the greedy pigs who own all the current systems don't want to share. EG: All you hear from existing coal fans is how hard and expensive it is to put an alternative in place. The truth is, they don't want to share the profits. Exactly the same for any alternative energy. Nothing is 'too hard' or 'too expensive' the reality is greed will always stop progress or corrupt it.

[Rallye Sport]

First world problems.
I work with a young guy from Tanzania, he's amazed what we have, waste and take for granted. Whilst on the other side of the world they're still on largely dirt roads, no running water and lucky to have electricity... meanwhile we're complaining from our comfortable homes, lol.

[GO FURTHER]

To those that don't understand why we don't have more infrastructure, these two images explains why....

Europe - 743 million
USA - 321 million
Australia - 24 million

Until Oz builds its population to at least 100 million, cost of infrastructure per capita will always be expensive. We missed the chance after the second world war.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by BAXRSIX

To those that don't understand why we don't have more infrastructure, these two images explains why....

Europe - 743 million
USA - 321 million
Australia - 24 million

Until Oz builds its population to at least 100 million, cost of infrastructure per capita will always be expensive. We missed the chance after the second world war.

image
image

What a load of BS!! We don't need to build roads (or any infra structure in the middle ion the desert which most of the land on the map is.

We inhabit 10% of that space on the map and only need infrastructure in the inhabitable areas.....Its our backward government that halts any type of progress nothing else.

Our construction industry has zero innovation and we are decades behind on technology.

[383hq]

1. Politics /legal system (not everything should be treated as a political /legal problem) subsets of this include
a) multiple levels of bureaucracy at national, state and local arenas, AND
b) the shift to policy that includes all minorities, not THE majority AND
c) lack of policy on "Core necessities" (Water, food, Transport, energy)

2. Corporate Tax receipts in a global environment - $ doesn't stay where it's earnt
3. Low population / large distance = user pays NOT a feasible strategy, and given we've moved away from nationalising infrastructure (see 1)
4. Ageing population (see 2)

There are examples of goodness - i.e Wagners' runway in Toowoomba

Sydney harbour bridge was built 10x larger then was needed in the day - they just knew the population would grow into it, and "Right first time" was more expensive at the time, but much cheaper long term. Short termist views (refer 1) mean nowadays they can't get the economics/feasibilty study through for sufficient payback.

The runway mentioned was primarily a private project so avoided many of the issues mentioned above, it may be great to send fresh veg to China, with demand from over a billion people increasing year on year- long term, it will probably push veg prices up locally, so not everyone will be in favour (see 1b)

Opposite example: insulation saga involving Garrett, some kid dies installing insulation, and a politician from Canberra is held responsible - There is risk to politicians in doing stuff, so appearing to do stuff, whilst actually doing nothing is safest.

Just my thoughts

[Trump]

Australia with a 100 million people... is a recipe for disaster. There isn't enough naturally occurring fresh water to support so many people, there isn't enough fertile arable land to feed so many without resorting to bulk importing, the vast majority of the Australian land mass is essentially uninhabitable desert.

[GO FURTHER]

Originally Posted by Trump

Australia with a 100 million people... is a recipe for disaster. There isn't enough naturally occurring fresh water to support so many people, there isn't enough fertile arable land to feed so many without resorting to bulk importing, the vast majority of the Australian land mass is essentially uninhabitable desert.

I was wondering how long it would take someone to raise this line of debate, because it is what most people think when you talk about increasing Australia's population.
However I was a little surprised it came from you Trump, being a deep thinker.

Okay, let's roll back to after the second world war.
The Jews and survivors of the Holocaust, a race without a homeland.
Nobody wanted them, even the ships were turned around if you recall.

Eventually a portion of Palestine was provided and in 1948 the State of Israel became a nation.

100,000 displaced Jews walked into this new homeland, of which half was desert.

Today the population of Israel is over 8,000,000, and have become a great nation. Using desalination plants, drip irrigation and aquifers they have managed to grow vegetables and fruit (Remember Jaffa oranges) and their innovations are helping to fill hungry bellies everywhere, but particularly in the developing world.

Now imagine if Australia had given them some of our harsh uninhabitable land to settle in instead.... I think you get my drift here.

Now you say that "there isn't enough fertile arable land to feed so many without resorting to bulk importing".

Do you realise that if you take all the food and produce Australia currently exports to the rest of the world, it would be enough to feed at least 56,000,000 people without even increasing current crops and production!

We currently have enough food to support far more than our current population that's for sure.

Even if we forget about the vast uninhabitable desert that much of Australia is.... Let's take the state of Victoria (size = 237,000km2) and a population of approx. 6,000,000 million which is not desert or uninhabitable by any means.

Now take the United Kingdom (size = 242,000Km2, so for argument's sake the same approximate size of Victoria)... The UK has a population of 65,000,000 by comparison.

We could easily fit 100,000,000 people in the existing habitable, non-desert areas of Australia.

Manufacturing in this country failed because of lack of population / scale of economy. We are taxed to death because to build infrastructure, provide healthcare, education, etc, etc, relies on only 24 million of us to pay for it.

The only way this country of ours will survive in generations to come is to increase our population and not to keep it small, as most Australians would prefer to see for selfish reasons.

If we don't then one day, maybe not in our lifetime but in our great grand children's time... We will be absorbed by America, lose our identity and become the 51st state of the USA to survive! ... (Or maybe plans are already in place if you believe in the New World Order)

[PooDog]

Originally Posted by BAXRSIX

I was wondering how long it would take someone to raise this line of debate, because it is what most people think when you talk about increasing Australia's population.
However I was a little surprised it came from you Trump, being a deep thinker.

Okay, let's roll back to after the second world war.
The Jews and survivors of the Holocaust, a race without a homeland.
Nobody wanted them, even the ships were turned around if you recall.

Eventually a portion of Palestine was provided and in 1948 the State of Israel became a nation.

100,000 displaced Jews walked into this new homeland, of which half was desert.

Today the population of Israel is over 8,000,000, and have become a great nation. Using desalination plants, drip irrigation and aquifers they have managed to grow vegetables and fruit (Remember Jaffa oranges) and their innovations are helping to fill hungry bellies everywhere, but particularly in the developing world.

Now imagine if Australia had given them some of our harsh uninhabitable land to settle in instead.... I think you get my drift here.

Now you say that "there isn't enough fertile arable land to feed so many without resorting to bulk importing".

Do you realise that if you take all the food and produce Australia currently exports to the rest of the world, it would be enough to feed at least 56,000,000 people without even increasing current crops and production!

We currently have enough food to support far more than our current population that's for sure.

Even if we forget about the vast uninhabitable desert that much of Australia is.... Let's take the state of Victoria (size = 237,000km2) and a population of approx. 6,000,000 million which is not desert or uninhabitable by any means.

Now take the United Kingdom (size = 242,000Km2, so for argument's sake the same approximate size of Victoria)... The UK has a population of 65,000,000 by comparison.

We could easily fit 100,000,000 people in the existing habitable, non-desert areas of Australia.

Manufacturing in this country failed because of lack of population / scale of economy. We are taxed to death because to build infrastructure, provide healthcare, education, etc, etc, relies on only 24 million of us to pay for it.

The only way this country of ours will survive in generations to come is to increase our population and not to keep it small, as most Australians would prefer to see for selfish reasons.

If we don't then one day, maybe not in our lifetime but in our great grand children's time... We will be absorbed by America, lose our identity and become the 51st state of the USA to survive! ... (Or maybe plans are already in place if you believe in the New World Order)

Our government in nz has opened the floodgates to anyone currently 70k a year it's the only thing propping up the economy artificially boosting growth in the economy all the politicians care about is keeping there snout in the trough and staying in power couldn't give a rats bum about future generations ....and instead of importing skilled people were short of they let in low skilled people and students that they can scam course fees out of for dodgey qualifications , then these people compete for the low skilled/ average jobs that kiwis need dodged employers import them in droves , and it's the old story supply and demand heaps of low skilled people prepared to do the jobs for s#%t so working conditions pay rates suffer so those at the top can cream it .....so good luck with population increases ....I'm sure your government would be more ethical than ours

[Trump]

Originally Posted by BAXRSIX

I was wondering how long it would take someone to raise this line of debate, because it is what most people think when you talk about increasing Australia's population.
However I was a little surprised it came from you Trump, being a deep thinker.

Okay, let's roll back to after the second world war.
The Jews and survivors of the Holocaust, a race without a homeland.
Nobody wanted them, even the ships were turned around if you recall.

Eventually a portion of Palestine was provided and in 1948 the State of Israel became a nation.

100,000 displaced Jews walked into this new homeland, of which half was desert.

Today the population of Israel is over 8,000,000, and have become a great nation. Using desalination plants, drip irrigation and aquifers they have managed to grow vegetables and fruit (Remember Jaffa oranges) and their innovations are helping to fill hungry bellies everywhere, but particularly in the developing world.

Now imagine if Australia had given them some of our harsh uninhabitable land to settle in instead.... I think you get my drift here.

Now you say that "there isn't enough fertile arable land to feed so many without resorting to bulk importing".

Do you realise that if you take all the food and produce Australia currently exports to the rest of the world, it would be enough to feed at least 56,000,000 people without even increasing current crops and production!

We currently have enough food to support far more than our current population that's for sure.

Even if we forget about the vast uninhabitable desert that much of Australia is.... Let's take the state of Victoria (size = 237,000km2) and a population of approx. 6,000,000 million which is not desert or uninhabitable by any means.

Now take the United Kingdom (size = 242,000Km2, so for argument's sake the same approximate size of Victoria)... The UK has a population of 65,000,000 by comparison.

We could easily fit 100,000,000 people in the existing habitable, non-desert areas of Australia.

Manufacturing in this country failed because of lack of population / scale of economy. We are taxed to death because to build infrastructure, provide healthcare, education, etc, etc, relies on only 24 million of us to pay for it.

The only way this country of ours will survive in generations to come is to increase our population and not to keep it small, as most Australians would prefer to see for selfish reasons.

If we don't then one day, maybe not in our lifetime but in our great grand children's time... We will be absorbed by America, lose our identity and become the 51st state of the USA to survive! ... (Or maybe plans are already in place if you believe in the New World Order)

You seem to have missed my "naturally occurring fresh water" bit. Israel does run large scale desalination, but in the situation where they have no power, they disappear within two years. And Israel is despised all throughout the Middle East; it isn't beyond the realm of possibilities that someone a bit unhinged takes out a couple of power plants...

Naturally available fresh water is the deal breaker when it comes to sustainable human habitation.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by BAXRSIX

I was wondering how long it would take someone to raise this line of debate, because it is what most people think when you talk about increasing Australia's population.
However I was a little surprised it came from you Trump, being a deep thinker.

Okay, let's roll back to after the second world war.
The Jews and survivors of the Holocaust, a race without a homeland.
Nobody wanted them, even the ships were turned around if you recall.

Eventually a portion of Palestine was provided and in 1948 the State of Israel became a nation.

100,000 displaced Jews walked into this new homeland, of which half was desert.

Today the population of Israel is over 8,000,000, and have become a great nation. Using desalination plants, drip irrigation and aquifers they have managed to grow vegetables and fruit (Remember Jaffa oranges) and their innovations are helping to fill hungry bellies everywhere, but particularly in the developing world.

Now imagine if Australia had given them some of our harsh uninhabitable land to settle in instead.... I think you get my drift here.

Now you say that "there isn't enough fertile arable land to feed so many without resorting to bulk importing".

Do you realise that if you take all the food and produce Australia currently exports to the rest of the world, it would be enough to feed at least 56,000,000 people without even increasing current crops and production!

We currently have enough food to support far more than our current population that's for sure.

Even if we forget about the vast uninhabitable desert that much of Australia is.... Let's take the state of Victoria (size = 237,000km2) and a population of approx. 6,000,000 million which is not desert or uninhabitable by any means.

Now take the United Kingdom (size = 242,000Km2, so for argument's sake the same approximate size of Victoria)... The UK has a population of 65,000,000 by comparison.

We could easily fit 100,000,000 people in the existing habitable, non-desert areas of Australia.

Manufacturing in this country failed because of lack of population / scale of economy. We are taxed to death because to build infrastructure, provide healthcare, education, etc, etc, relies on only 24 million of us to pay for it.

The only way this country of ours will survive in generations to come is to increase our population and not to keep it small, as most Australians would prefer to see for selfish reasons.

If we don't then one day, maybe not in our lifetime but in our great grand children's time... We will be absorbed by America, lose our identity and become the 51st state of the USA to survive! ... (Or maybe plans are already in place if you believe in the New World Order)

Well my Sir name is Hebrew but firstly Jews are not a race, they are in fact a religion. Hebrews maybe called a race because they are the Tribe of Israel and Tribe of Judah but nowadays some like to claim them as Semitic, that maybe true because of Cain and Abel were brothers but Arabs were truly referred to as the Semitic people. but due to socialist workings of Political Correctness we have the game play of bastardisation of the words nowadays. no true practicing Jew referred themselves a Semite, because Semites are (were) referred to as the Muslim Islam.
The main reason why the Jews State has progressed is that the people were united and better educated and truly comprehend what business is and worked for a common cause. it's a crappy worthless bit of land that they made a go of and look at USA or Australia, a great land and full of fools who could not make a go of a land that is great.
Nazi Germany reason why it turned around and powered on so well economically was 'the people were united to work for a goal' and Australia once had a goal, but we don't get that united patriotic nationalistic brotherhood any more, sadly it's all about the individual now and dog eat dog get what you can get by hook or by crook, head in the sand attitude and huge ego driven fools with no morals worth jack but just full of foolish self rights, we once could make cars here and we still could with no problems, but the people now just give up, if the generations before us were just degenerate like how Australia's are now, we would be still be living in stick huts.

It's true that we are being taxed to death and supporting every no hopper you could to think of, but kick the s---t out of people who work for themselves and all the red tape, regulations ect just works against anyone who try's to have a go.

Just look at USA the greatest Nation on earth is now bankrupt and there is no excuse for it at all, no one could be truly that stupid !
The same with Australia our Nation should be that wealthy that we don't borrow a cent but only be lending money to others.

Something is wrong if a man starts his working life and does not own a home by 55yo and should question yourself as to why and the same thing with a Nation, Australia has been here long enough by now to be able to stand on it's own in the world. there is no excuse for it at all !
What's Australia going to be in another 100 years still a busted **** garbage dump scraping for money to get things done and still supporting all the dead beats to just be empowered dead beats.

People are not truly looking towards the future because they are all wrapped up in a narrow minded selfish socialist politically correct dream world tailored for misfits and every 3rd rate dingbat cause.
I have lost count of the people in there 30's with claims that are totally delusional and they are 3rd rate tradesmen plus they are on drugs.

[roKWiz]

Here's a good example of our brilliant infrastructure. Took this picture last week when a freight train ploughed up our rail crossing.
This is one of hundreds of sink holes created when Australian Rail and Track "fixed" the rail corridor between Sydney and Melbourne.
They spent billions on this, people out in the country are calling for heads to roll.
Meanwhile all who were involved in this fiasco are blaming one another.
Just recently politicians are asking ARTC to do a costing to fix it while they give more money to them.
Sort of like leaving the fox in charge of the hen house.

Australia is too busy trying to scrape every last cent of profit from its existing infrastructure and will continue to do so, without maintenance, until that infrastructure degrades beyond the point of usability. Then we'll all stand around with our hands on our hips, wondering what happened and looking for whoever is going to pay us our next dollar.

As a nation, we've no forward-thinking ability and no desire to build any form of industry that provides sustainable profit in the long-term. Let's just keep scraping everything we have from our ****ty country until it literally has nothing left. It's all about short-term profitability, right???