muso wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 8:27pm:



We're not allowed to install a mobile phone range extender because Telstra thinks it wouldn't meet their quality guidelines

Mobile phone networks are built in a honeycomb cell structure where frequencies are re used at specifit intervals. If you up the power of a reciever you could interfere with cells using the same frequency.

Quote:


Without some freedoms you can't, eg freedom of the press, freedom of speech, the right to run for office etc. But none of those freedoms are relevant to compulsory voting. Denying people the right to not vote does not undermine democracy in the same way that denying people the right to run for office does. It is irrelevant.

Perhaps you have a more substantial argument than 'things going hand in hand'? If you do, now would be the time.

Quote:


There's a job for you when you get back home Andrei. We'll even pay you 50c a day and give you a chinese mobile phone.

What's your point Freediver?

Mine is that a developing country like this one is providing better services and better standards than Australia.

You can't even deny that the Chinese run it like clockwork and keep a standard of cleanliness that shames the Aussie standards.

Any wonder we accept being forced to the polls and being told all the time we can't do things.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 9:36pm:


My point is that voluntary voting undermines democracy.

About your China thing - all of what you describe can be attributed to a much denser population and people willing to work for 50c a day. I alluded to this in an earlier post. A mobile phone is much cheaper if you share the network with 1.3 billion people rather than 20 million.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 9:36pm:


You must like the Chineese political systen then if it is producing such good results?

Are you saying that democracy is over rated?

I can not see any relivant connection between WiFi, cleanliness, the Chineese political ragime and manditory voting.

With optional v's manditory voting the major consideration in Australia relates directly to the number of tooth paste brands available and their flaviours, this to me looks like a different way of expressing what you are saying.

Looks like on some threads (or intermittently) the top post listed does not appear until the next new post replaces it?

Bobby. wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 9:30pm:

Rudd Government Called for Submissions on Compulsory Voting in 2009.

The Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, and other political figures have all launched attacks on the Queensland government this week for daring to ask for submissions on whether Queensland should end compulsory voting.

An attack on Australian democracy some cried. A return to the Bjelke-Petersen era said others.

What no one seems to have noticed is that it was less than four years ago that the Rudd government asked for public submissions on exactly the same question.

Admittedly the Rudd government's Green Paper on the electoral system was much more wide ranging, and compulsory voting was only one amongst a vast array of questions on which the government asked for submissions.

The Rudd government's Green Paper entitled "Strengthening Australian Democracy" was more than 200 pages long with another 30 pages of annexes. You can still find it on the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet's website at this link.

The Green Paper was typical of the Rudd government. Instead of inquiring into specific issues that it wanted addressed, it launched an enquiry into every aspect of the conduct of elections in Australia. It was open ended, unfocused, and included numerous issues in which the government had no interest. As far as I can see, submissions on the green paper sank without trace and there has never been a government response.

However, the paper is a gold mine of information, ideas and sources on Australian elections. A great resource, and a wonderful starting document for more focused efforts at electoral change since.

Chapter 11 of the document deals with the conduct of the voting process. At the end of the chapter, on page 183, the paper called for submissions on the issues raised in the chapter, and then listed eight specific points for discussion. This has been reproduced below. I have highlighted two questions also referred to in the new Queensland inquiry.