LLU Links

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by -=rjh=-, May 7, 2006.

  1. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    -=rjh=-, May 7, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. -=rjh=-

    SchoolTech Guest

    Theft of Private Property Links

    -=rjh=- wrote:

    > Thanks are really due to these guys, who worked really hard to make this
    > happen, this time.



    Why don't you just call it what it is. Theft of Telecom's property by a
    socialist Labour Government.

    http://www.act.org.nz/news-article.aspx?id=27571
    SchoolTech, May 7, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Re: Theft of Private Property Links

    SchoolTech wrote:
    > -=rjh=- wrote:
    >
    >> Thanks are really due to these guys, who worked really hard to make
    >> this happen, this time.

    >
    >
    > Why don't you just call it what it is.


    I'll tell you what. Why don't *you* call it what you think it is? I'm
    not calling it anything, and certainly not at your suggestion.
    -=rjh=-, May 7, 2006
    #3
  4. Re: Theft of Private Property Links

    On a pleasant day while strolling in nz.comp, a person by the name of
    SchoolTech exclaimed:
    > Why don't you just call it what it is. Theft of Telecom's property by a
    > socialist Labour Government.
    >
    > http://www.act.org.nz/news-article.aspx?id=27571


    LOL!

    Very amusing ...

    Perhaps you could expand on how it's a good thing to have a single
    company with a monopoly over a key piece of infrastructure built by the
    country over many decades.

    In your argument, you can ignore the admittedly foolish decision to sell
    it in the first place.



    --
    aaronl at consultant dot com
    For every expert, there is an equal and
    opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
    Aaron Lawrence, May 7, 2006
    #4
  5. Re: Theft of Private Property Links

    On Sun, 07 May 2006 18:18:43 +1200, someone purporting to be Aaron
    Lawrence didst scrawl:

    > On a pleasant day while strolling in nz.comp, a person by the name of
    > SchoolTech exclaimed:
    >> Why don't you just call it what it is. Theft of Telecom's property by a
    >> socialist Labour Government.
    >>
    >> http://www.act.org.nz/news-article.aspx?id=27571

    >

    *SNIP*
    > In your argument, you can ignore the admittedly foolish decision to sell
    > it in the first place.


    But Act can't ignore it. Their glorious founders were responsible for that
    decision, so for them it's dogmatic lore that the decision was not only
    not foolish it was actually "the right thing to do"[tm].

    --
    Matthew Poole
    "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."
    Matthew Poole, May 7, 2006
    #5
  6. -=rjh=-

    Philip Guest

    Re: Theft of Private Property Links

    SchoolTech wrote:
    > -=rjh=- wrote:
    >
    >> Thanks are really due to these guys, who worked really hard to make
    >> this happen, this time.

    >
    >
    > Why don't you just call it what it is. Theft of Telecom's property by a
    > socialist Labour Government.
    >
    > http://www.act.org.nz/news-article.aspx?id=27571


    This is simply not true. Telecom abused its market dominance, ripped off
    New Zealand businesses and citizens mercilessly, and now has to face the
    consequences. The party's over for Telecom, and a good thing too.

    Or are you really saying that ACT would restore the Telecom monopoly and
    reinstate the $29 000 a year broadband charge to businesses?

    Philip
    Philip, May 7, 2006
    #6
  7. -=rjh=-

    Peter Guest

    Re: Theft of Private Property Links

    SchoolTech wrote:
    > Why don't you just call it what it is. Theft of Telecom's property by a
    > socialist Labour Government.
    > http://www.act.org.nz/news-article.aspx?id=27571


    So, which side is ACT fighting for - the foreign owned corporates or the
    consumers and tax payers of NZ?
    When I voted for them, I thought that ACT would look after the interests of
    NZ consumers and tax payers.

    History has shown that Telecom is a foreign owned corporate that has made
    huge profits out of a NZ monopoly, and in the process driven NZ way down
    the global merit order in terms of telcommunications. That situation could
    not be allowed to continue.


    Peter
    Peter, May 7, 2006
    #7
  8. -=rjh=-

    Brian Dooley Guest

    Re: Theft of Private Property Links

    On Sun, 07 May 2006 18:45:06 +1200, Matthew Poole
    <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 07 May 2006 18:18:43 +1200, someone purporting to be Aaron
    >Lawrence didst scrawl:
    >
    >> On a pleasant day while strolling in nz.comp, a person by the name of
    >> SchoolTech exclaimed:
    >>> Why don't you just call it what it is. Theft of Telecom's property by a
    >>> socialist Labour Government.
    >>>
    >>> http://www.act.org.nz/news-article.aspx?id=27571

    >>

    >*SNIP*
    >> In your argument, you can ignore the admittedly foolish decision to sell
    >> it in the first place.

    >
    >But Act can't ignore it. Their glorious founders were responsible for that
    >decision, so for them it's dogmatic lore that the decision was not only
    >not foolish it was actually "the right thing to do"[tm].


    Care to put names on the culprits, Matthew?
    --

    Brian Dooley

    Wellington New Zealand
    Brian Dooley, May 8, 2006
    #8
  9. Re: Theft of Private Property Links

    On Mon, 08 May 2006 11:18:42 +1200, someone purporting to be Brian Dooley
    didst scrawl:

    > On Sun, 07 May 2006 18:45:06 +1200, Matthew Poole
    > <> wrote:

    *SNIP*
    >>But Act can't ignore it. Their glorious founders were responsible for that
    >>decision, so for them it's dogmatic lore that the decision was not only
    >>not foolish it was actually "the right thing to do"[tm].

    >
    > Care to put names on the culprits, Matthew?


    Richard Prebble and Roger Douglas were key drivers of the privatisation
    agenda of the Fourth Labour Government. However, on looking further, it
    looks like both of them got turfed out of Cabinet prior to the sale of
    Telecom.
    Who WERE the Ministers who made that particularly fucking stupid decision?

    --
    Matthew Poole
    "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."
    Matthew Poole, May 8, 2006
    #9
  10. -=rjh=-

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Re: Theft of Private Property Links

    Matthew Poole wrote:
    > On Mon, 08 May 2006 11:18:42 +1200, someone purporting to be Brian
    > Dooley didst scrawl:
    >
    >> On Sun, 07 May 2006 18:45:06 +1200, Matthew Poole
    >> <> wrote:

    > *SNIP*
    >>> But Act can't ignore it. Their glorious founders were responsible
    >>> for that decision, so for them it's dogmatic lore that the decision
    >>> was not only not foolish it was actually "the right thing to
    >>> do"[tm].

    >>
    >> Care to put names on the culprits, Matthew?

    >
    > Richard Prebble and Roger Douglas were key drivers of the
    > privatisation agenda of the Fourth Labour Government. However, on
    > looking further, it looks like both of them got turfed out of Cabinet
    > prior to the sale of Telecom.


    LOL, They were probably plotting privitisation of the armed forces and the
    government.

    > Who WERE the Ministers who made that particularly fucking stupid
    > decision?


    Dunno. Probablt just 'droids finishing up what was on the desks they
    inherited.
    --
    Shaun.
    ~misfit~, May 8, 2006
    #10
  11. -=rjh=-

    Brian Dooley Guest

    Re: Theft of Private Property Links

    On Mon, 8 May 2006 14:19:25 +1200, "~misfit~"
    <> wrote:

    >Matthew Poole wrote:
    >> On Mon, 08 May 2006 11:18:42 +1200, someone purporting to be Brian
    >> Dooley didst scrawl:
    >>
    >>> On Sun, 07 May 2006 18:45:06 +1200, Matthew Poole
    >>> <> wrote:

    >> *SNIP*
    >>>> But Act can't ignore it. Their glorious founders were responsible
    >>>> for that decision, so for them it's dogmatic lore that the decision
    >>>> was not only not foolish it was actually "the right thing to
    >>>> do"[tm].
    >>>
    >>> Care to put names on the culprits, Matthew?

    >>
    >> Richard Prebble and Roger Douglas were key drivers of the
    >> privatisation agenda of the Fourth Labour Government. However, on
    >> looking further, it looks like both of them got turfed out of Cabinet
    >> prior to the sale of Telecom.

    >
    >LOL, They were probably plotting privitisation of the armed forces and the
    >government.
    >
    >> Who WERE the Ministers who made that particularly fucking stupid
    >> decision?

    >
    >Dunno. Probablt just 'droids finishing up what was on the desks they
    >inherited.


    The deal was actually signed off when Mike Moore was PM in Sept
    1990, but it wouldn't have made any difference who signed the
    docs. As Hindenburg said to the Kaiser in 1914, once you set a
    million men marching it's impossible to turn them around.
    --

    Brian Dooley

    Wellington New Zealand
    Brian Dooley, May 10, 2006
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. News Reader
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    347
    Flyer
    Mar 31, 2007
  2. News Reader
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    542
    News Reader
    Jul 30, 2007
  3. Uncle StoatWarbler

    Timing of the LLU decision press release

    Uncle StoatWarbler, Dec 26, 2003, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    478
    Brendan
    Dec 28, 2003
  4. Bling Bling

    LLU in the UK

    Bling Bling, Oct 19, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    365
    Bling Bling
    Oct 19, 2005
  5. Matthew Poole

    Now why on earth would we want LLU?

    Matthew Poole, Apr 24, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    295
    Matthew Poole
    Apr 25, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page