Work Choices: Another example of why it's fucked

[Dän]

Do the Labor party in SA need the nats though?

Probably not, Labor will be in for ever here; which is strange given that SA is a very conservative state. Funny how people get pissed of at Rann all the time, like there was a vote over the tram line extention, to which it was overwhemingly no, but he didnt any ways If Howard did that I would be going

I dont really give a shit either way, but yeh, he'll be in for as long as he wants to be. Its just many millions that could be spent elsewhere, cant people walk 15 min or get a free bus for 5 min?! Fucked up world man.

 

[Goreripper]

So, people were up in arms because Rann extended a tram line? Are you able to explain this a little more? If Iemma announced he was extending trams (ahem, light rail) here in Sydney there would be parties in the street.

 

[Stonewall]

yeah, kudos to anyone making an investment in public transport infrastructure, other than roads that is.

 

[Goreripper]

Well, agreed, but without knowing the circumstances of what Dan implied, I can't comment either way.

 

[Dän]

Like I said, I dont care either way. But, in Adelaide the trams used to run everywhere, now it only goes from glenelg to victoria sq, which is fine for me. When you get off at Vic Sq, that is where the city pretyt much begins, to get to the other side of the city is about a 20 min walk, or you can get a FREE bus that takes 5 min. So, imo, there is no need to extend the tram line along a road which it already used to run up years ago, when you can get a free buss which will get you there even quicker than the tram extension will.

The delays the roadworks have caused are quite bad, and the cost of the extension isnt worth it, and most people opposed for those very reasons. Once again, I dont care either way, it just seems quite inefficeint to rebuild something that was knocked down.

You will disagree because it is the doings of a labor gov, so what ever they do is in the best interest of the people and social well fare, if it were Howard you would be opposed saying he is trying to create a Nazi tram line to exterminate the jews or something.

Also, they are spening money on making an underground where the intersection of south rd and anzac hwy is; on my run into town in peak hr, i really dont mind waitng 7-8 min in traffic, Adelaide isnt big, not many people, not many cars, not much congestion relative to other places; you need to keep that in mind when pissing away millions of dollars on trivial things. Crank down on violence and drugs, Adelaide is fucked with drugs, im more concerned about growing up in a state where i cant go out without being offered extacy than wating 10 min in traffic; am I the only one, or will extending a tram line derive greater social benefit?

 

[Goreripper]

I can't see the problem with expanding public transport. Admittedly, it's Adelaide, where it takes five minutes to walk across the entire CBD, but anything that improves people's ability to get from Point A to Point B that doesn't involve an internal combustion engine seems like a positive plan to me. You say the bus is free. Will the tram be free? Will the bus still run? Does the bus run on diesel, or LPG?
Also, your point about the tunnel. It might seem trivial to build it now, but in the other post you're talking about being the PM in 30 years. Adelaide will likely be a lot bigger by then, with more traffic and congestion. Isn't it better the tunnel is built now, rather than in 30 years. Imagine if they'd waited until now to build the Sydney Harbour Bridge.

Journo: "PM Dan, what do you think about the traffic crisis on the ANZAC Hwy in Adelaide?"
Dan: "Well, Rann should have built the tunnel back in 2007. Bloody pinko."

 

[Stonewall]

Haha, although if Rann was really on the ball, he would be investing in ferries.

 

[Dän]

Journo: "PM Dan, what do you think about the traffic crisis on the ANZAC Hwy in Adelaide?"
Dan: "Well, Rann should have built the tunnel back in 2007. Bloody pinko."

That is so what I would say as well man, classic.

The tram isnt free and the bus wont run

Also, in peak hr, you cannot get on the tram as it is too full, sometimes you need to wait for 1 or 2 to go past before you can get on, adding more stops will only make the problem worse, and they wont put more trams on as it causes traffic delays, and no south rd or anzac hwy dont run through the tram line so the underpass wont help.

I dont care as i dont get the tram anymore.
Once again, you have to agree with Rann because you are the kind of pinko who will agree with labor no matter what; so debating with people like you is fucked.

SO yeh, piss away millions on shit that doesnt matter or invest it in trying to get rid of bikies and drugs; id prefer the gov to try and control the drug problem we have here, it's fucked man.

 

[Priest of Evil]

As an Adelaidean, I havent caught a train for over two decades, back when we used to go jetty jumping down the Bay.

Anyways, I'm a labour guy but I think the tram idea is a waste of money, for similar reasons as Dan pointed out.

I think its more for an aesthetic look for tourists rather than a practical reason.

I agree with the upgrade of the roads and believe more money should be spent on them.

 

[Shannow]

id prefer the gov to try and control the drug problem we have here, it's fucked man.

But Dan, we live in an economy rather than a society.

Drugs don't affect interest rates or inflation, so why should the Govt give a shit ?

Anyway, the market will fix it.

 

[Shannow]

Internationally (and even in Sydney) it's been demonstrated that if you build more roads, then people will fill them up with cars. Try travelling the M2/M4/M7.

I'm starting to lean away from light rail, and more towards busses, after reading (quite) a few books on the Greenhouse issues.

Heavy rail tends to be radial from the major city centre, and is great at getting people funnelled into/out of the CBD. Problem is what to do when they get to the station closest to where they want to be, and need to move across the "spokes" of the heavy rail...IMO, busses are the best at this function.

Too difficult, and they'll drive to work.

Busses also enable routes and frequency of services to be altered (I said "allowed", not that this flexibility is oft used) to meet demand, where light rail is fixed.

 

[Stonewall]

Buses are definitely one of the best ways to go. The potential for flexibility is there, as well as for cleaner fuels and technology, as polution (noisy and smelly) while they are idling is a problem. They are also easier to replace and update and keep modern than fixed-rail forms, as such easier to keep them an attractive option.

Also very cheap for private investors and operators to get involved compared to fixed infrastructure options.

 

[Southy]

but gov peeps don't want it to be easy, if they do more and more buses we don't see that, if they rip shit up and build rail lines, we see our money at work

 

[Dän]

But Dan, we live in an economy rather than a society.

Drugs don't affect interest rates or inflation, so why should the Govt give a shit ?

Anyway, the market will fix it.

Drugs to affect gov... Fucks people up, cant work, they spend $ on drugs not goods, need welfare, go to rehab. Theres heaps and heaps of economic problems.

Im not a 100% liberalist economist, so the market doesnt fix everything, I have never contended that it does.

 

[Winmar]

if it were Howard you would be opposed saying he is trying to create a Nazi tram line to exterminate the jews or something.

That made me laugh.

 

[Dän]

Yeh well its true

Howard is a champ though, vote for him. The new right is gaining force!!!

 

[Goreripper]

Drugs to affect gov... Fucks people up, cant work, they spend $ on drugs not goods, need welfare, go to rehab. Theres heaps and heaps of economic problems.

The drugs that cause the biggest problems in society are the legal ones, tobacco and alcohol. PArt of the problem with illegal drugs is that they are, well, illegal. There's no way to regulate where they're sold, who sells them, what they're made from and there's no way to know who's taking them. There's an argument that if you heroin legal via perscription to registered addicts, for example, part of the drug problem would disappear overnight. A domestic, legal opium poppy industry would devastate organisations like Al Quaeda who make their money through the heroin trade, usage could be controlled, taxed and users would be less afraid of seeking help. There's immense problems with all anti-drug strategies and legalisation of some of them is merely one option. Zero-tolerance simply doesn't work but, getting back to my original point, booze and ciggas cause more health and social problems that all the illegal drugs put together. If the conservatives really wanted to crack down on drugs, they would ban tobacco and massively restrict the availibility of alcohol.

I agree about the tram though. It's a pretty dumb idea.

 

[Dän]

I agree about booze and smokes causing lots of social problems, id sooner booze be illegal and dope legal personally, amongst other reasons, dope doesnt make you as fat, nor do you need to smoke 6 cones to be cruising

 

[Winmar]

But you can have one bad cone that fucks you, while one beer could only get the world's biggest Cadbury drunk. Most people drink in moderation, but there's a lot of people who overdo it and make things difficult for those around them.