
Originally Posted by
POD
Wow Strangy, that's quite a rant mate. Of course I have to agree with a lot of the sentiments expressed but can I please point out a few things in response;
.....
There was a poster in the general store in Tibooburra last month with a slogan to the effect that people in the outback deserve the same infrastructure as people in the city- it was specifically in reference to mobile phones. This means, of course, that they want people who do not live in the outback to pay for it. The reality is that outback life is hugely subsidised by the majority population who live in populated areas.
While I agree with most of what you say, I feel the need to comment on your last paragraph. The reality is that for most of the period since 1788, while most of the people have lived in "populated areas" (mainly Sydney and other capitals), the economy has always depended on rural industries (mostly farming and mining), providing a massive subsidy to the cities, either directly or through tax policies that favour the cities, such as the protection of manufacturing industries, and in return are saddled with laws and regulations designed to meet city needs with no consideration for their necessity or the burdens they impose on rural dwellers.
One of the latest of these is the assumption by both governments and business, that everyone has ready access to mobile phone and internet, while ignoring the fact that this is not available to many rural dwellers, or if it is, is expensive and unsatisfactory compared to cities. To then turn round and refer to the desire for this as a "subsidy" when the requirement for it is created by citydwellers is rather like adding insult to injury.
And this is exactly what this whole thread is about!
John
JDNSW
1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol
Bookmarks