Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Steve Ballmer serves up a data trove about government spending in the US

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 273 posts

Re: Steve Ballmer serves up a data trove about government spending in the US

#181

Post by ido »

sangnoir wrote: post #151
ido wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why did Microsoft stagnate under his leadership, once Gates left?

Because intelligence by itself does not assure success. I'm not a Balmer/Microsoft fan, but 'stagnated' isn't the word I'd use to describe Microsoft in Balmer's era: they missed mobile and got into search late, but they did extremely well in other areas.

He stepped in in 2000, with microsoft being the top dog of the tech world, and left in 2014 with them not even being one of the "big four".

Right now Apple, Amazon, Google & HP are all bigger (in terms of revenue) than Microsoft:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_informatio...

Re: Steve Ballmer serves up a data trove about government spending in the US

#182

Post by crusso »

parasubvert wrote: post #101
Clownshoesms wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, I think absolute transparency should be a given with any democratic government. One reason, aside from national security to a hopefully minor degree, is to cover their behinds when stupid things are done (and they're done an awful lot in the public service). I think if we had a crystal-clear/omniscient view of the wastage that goes on in various governments, we'd be collectively appalled.

"I think if we had a crystal-clear/omniscient view of the wastage that goes on in various governments, we'd be collectively appalled." I think the opposite. Most people already believe the government is incredibly wasteful, there's a much greater opportunity in highlighting where it surprisingly efficient. This will serve to blow up many ideological truisms.

Individuals have very personal views of finances. When people are asked how they should spend their own money, they're very careful with it and analyze expenditures and benefits carefully. On an individual basis, money is spent efficiently and people understand that.

As the responsibility for spending money is removed from the individual, efficiency plummets. Government jobs are the ultimate in a lack of accountability. Voters don't have the visibility to see what politicians and other government workers spend money on. The one entity that should effectively provide oversight on how the government spends our money is the government itself - and they're loathe to limit their own power. Then on top of all that, even voters aren't spending their own money when they make voting decisions. They're mostly rationalizing that their voting decisions are affecting the other guy, like "the rich".

Re: Steve Ballmer serves up a data trove about government spending in the US

#183

Post by muerdeme »

parasubvert wrote: post #101
Clownshoesms wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, I think absolute transparency should be a given with any democratic government. One reason, aside from national security to a hopefully minor degree, is to cover their behinds when stupid things are done (and they're done an awful lot in the public service). I think if we had a crystal-clear/omniscient view of the wastage that goes on in various governments, we'd be collectively appalled.

"I think if we had a crystal-clear/omniscient view of the wastage that goes on in various governments, we'd be collectively appalled." I think the opposite. Most people already believe the government is incredibly wasteful, there's a much greater opportunity in highlighting where it surprisingly efficient. This will serve to blow up many ideological truisms.

Agreed. There is a very interesting and recent EconTalk podcast that touches on this. A great majority Americans are proud to be taxpayers, but many also feel that the money is spended wastefully. When interviewed in depth, this often reflects partisan misunderstanding.

EconTalk: Vanessa Williamson on Taxes and Read My Lips https://overcast.fm/+JDN9N7o

Re: Steve Ballmer serves up a data trove about government spending in the US

#184

Post by mistersys »

flukus wrote: post #117
joshmn wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And he wonders why people are increasingly skeptical of his administration.

Increasingly? Weren't most of his supporters somewhat skeptical from the start?

His approval rating was highest his first week as president:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

Re: Steve Ballmer serves up a data trove about government spending in the US

#185

Post by mulletbum »

ekianjo wrote: post #141
dragonwriter wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There should be one (huge) annual spreadsheet published showing how much money came in (federal, state, and local levels), with a detailed accounting of where every penny went, just like I am required to do for my business to claim deductions. Except for some things like certain national security parts that are specifically protected by law from detailed disclosure, federal, state, and most local governments make a…

they could put a black box for such expenses and still give the detail for everything else.

Wouldn't people be able to deduce the spend on this black box section?

Re: Steve Ballmer serves up a data trove about government spending in the US

#186

Post by rsp1984 »

phreeza wrote: post #142
JamieF1 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't believe I'm posting something positive about the Irish government but they recently launched this site which is actually pretty decent. Pity other governments don't do the same. http://whereyourmoneygoes.gov.ie

Germany has something very similar, only in german though. It tracks income and expenses, as well as the actual and planned budgets for the past years: https://www.bundeshaushalt-info.de/

Very cool! Is the same also available for the spending of Bundeslaender as well as communities? Lots of taxes also go there.

Re: Steve Ballmer serves up a data trove about government spending in the US

#187

Post by pluma »

gonvaled wrote: post #167
pluma wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need to forgive someone to accept that they have changed and that there are bigger problems. If you hated MS in the '90s/'00s for what they did back then, you should have that same hatred right now, but not especially for MS but also for Apple and (to a lesser extent) Google.

Apple is the nail in the coffin. The coffin was ordered by M$. But the battle, and the war, was lost long before Apple became the behemonth it is now. Apple did nothing to kill OS, it arrived when it was dead. As for Google, they actually played a positive role back then. Whatever they do now, does not matter anymore. The window of oportunity closed long ago, and it was M$ who did it.

> they actually played a positive role back then

Stop living in the past. Do you just want to wallow in self-pity about what could have been or are you actually upset about real problems that are fixable?

Apple is halting progress of web standards right now. Apple is locking in users into its closed ecosystem (good luck trying to develop for iOS without macOS). Google and Facebook are "embracing, extending, extinguishing" the web (AMP, Instant Articles, PNaCl, etc). Even the W3C has bowed down to the copyright industry with proprietary window dressing in the name of DRM.

Not everything these companies do is evil, the attacks are far less orchestrated than those carried out by Microsoft back in the days, but they're happening and they're here.

If you just want to hate Microsoft for nostalgia's sake like the grumpy old vet who still can't get over how the US lost in Vietnam, that's fine. But don't pretend you care about principles if all you can do is hold a grudge against what was and don't give a fuck about what is.

Re: Steve Ballmer serves up a data trove about government spending in the US

#188

Post by spangry »

Clownshoesms wrote: post #148
nl wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This in one some people did fro GovHack in Australia: http://theopenbudget.org

Interesting thanks, hadn't seen it. I delve into the Treasury Portfolio wedge and I get a sinister "Outcome 1" looking as big as our welfare budget (I think from a quick squiz this says 120 billion for welfare but I thought it was closer to 180 billion). What's all the stuff under the Treasury portfolio?

I can't figure this out myself. I could swear that budget accounting is designed to be as unreadable and incomprehensible as humanly possible. Take a look at http://www.budget.gov.au/2016-17/content/bp4/html/05_art-16.... and scroll right to the bottom. Taken at face value, this seems to suggest total actual appropriations just for the Treasury portfolio were $765bn in 2015-16. Given this equates to about 43% of nominal GDP in 2015, there must be something else going on here that I''m missing.

Re: Steve Ballmer serves up a data trove about government spending in the US

#189

Post by kitd »

JamieF1 wrote: post #112
roymurdock wrote: post #48

I have found this website very helpful in the past few years when researching government financial info: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/total_spending_chart I reached out to the website developer/maintainer/creator, Chris Chantrill, telling him I appreciated his work on the site and asking if he needed help (seems like a 1 man operation?) - here's how he responded: Thanks! I started the site in 2007 when "I coul…

Can't believe I'm posting something positive about the Irish government but they recently launched this site which is actually pretty decent. Pity other governments don't do the same. http://whereyourmoneygoes.gov.ie

UK version:

http://app.wheredoesmymoneygo.org//

Re: Steve Ballmer serves up a data trove about government spending in the US

#190

Post by Delmania »

mistersys wrote: post #184
flukus wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Increasingly? Weren't most of his supporters somewhat skeptical from the start?

His approval rating was highest his first week as president: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

That's because he fired missiles in Syria and detonated the MOAB in Afghanistan. Whenever a president commits an act of war against a publicly perceived threat, their ratings get a temporary boost.
Post reply on HN