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

Census Bureau's American FactFinder software cost taxpayers $33.3 million

wmhartnett.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 132 posts

Re: Census Bureau's American FactFinder software cost taxpayers $33.3 million

#111

Post by Spooky23 »

crusso wrote: post #86
_delirium wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't really seem like a public/private difference, but an enterprise/non-enterprise difference: Fortune500 firms are no more efficient than government contracting is, really. While it's a lot in other contexts, $33m for a custom enterprise software project, even one that seems like it ought to cost much less, is pretty middle-of-the-road as a price.

Having worked at a company that's top 20 in the Fortune500 and having a good friend who does government contract work... you have absolutely no clue about what you're talking about in terms of the relative amount of waste exercised by government vs corporate entities. The fundamental reason why there's such a difference in efficiency between private efforts and government ones is this: Private companies that are horr…

I worked for a successful Fortune 50 company whose products you use every day. I worked out of an office in NYC, and flew to the west coast every two weeks to attend a staff meeting that lasted about 2.5 hours. I literally earned enough frequent travel points that I didnt pay for a vacation from 2003-2009.

If you work for a company like Microsoft or IBM or Bank of America, you work in a bureaucracy at least as dysfunctional and Byzantine as an average US state. The Federal government is a whole other beast unto itself, but there are probably companies as screwy as they are too.

The fact that the private entity purges some folks doesn't make them better.

Re: Census Bureau's American FactFinder software cost taxpayers $33.3 million

#112

Post by mathattack »

wpietri wrote: post #107
mathattack wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it "not having been associated" or "not being blamed due to misfollowed procedures"?

My impression was "associated".

Given all the failed government projects, I feel like that people say, "As long as you can't prove it wasn't my fault" (as opposed to "my project") they won't get fired. After all nobody got fired from Big Government for following the rules... (Sarcasm intended)

Re: Census Bureau's American FactFinder software cost taxpayers $33.3 million

#113

Post by MBCook »

wpietri wrote: post #104
briandear wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly why I fear government managed healthcare.

I think there's less reason to fear that. Some of the best parts of government are the science- and data-driven ones, and evidence-based medicine provides a lot of data. Plus, doctors are notoriously independent. Personally, I'd feel much better about government-run healthcare than for-profit-insurer-run healthcare. At least with the government option, everybody works for me, either directly or indirectly. Plus, a bu…

I really like single payer in theory, but I'm with briandear on this one. There is already enough monkeying with what Medicare should and shouldn't pay for. My fear is the more money is involved, the less science/data/evidence based the decisions will be.

That's why I'm torn on the whole thing. I think for-profit should be able to do it better, but the current system clearly isn't structured in a way that encourages it. I have no idea whether the devil I know is better or not, and it's a big decision.

Re: Census Bureau's American FactFinder software cost taxpayers $33.3 million

#114

Post by bradleyjg »

mseebach wrote: post #100
bradleyjg wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell that to the people being bombed. Defense my ass.

Tell what to the people being bombed? That you're hard at work changing their fortune by refusing to reform the IT procurement process of the US government? They will be eternally grateful.

... that more money allocated to the 'defense' budget is a good thing.

Re: Census Bureau's American FactFinder software cost taxpayers $33.3 million

#115

Post by MBCook »

_delirium wrote: post #77
binarycrusader wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The midwest (Kansas, Missouri, so on...)? Seriously. $40K a year annual salary, and if you add in all the benefits, that might hit $66K.

I don't know much about Kansas, but that is definitely not the going rate for enterprise programmers in St. Louis. But in any case, what proportion of software jobs are in the (non-Chicago) Midwest, anyway? The government is basically stuck with whoever submits a bid, which is most likely to be companies in the "IBM and competitors" category, and their cost structures are well into the $200k range (I wouldn't be surp…

In KC, $40k might be a fresh-out-of-school salary, but even then it sounds low to me.

Re: Census Bureau's American FactFinder software cost taxpayers $33.3 million

#116

Post by mseebach »

bradleyjg wrote: post #114
mseebach wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell what to the people being bombed? That you're hard at work changing their fortune by refusing to reform the IT procurement process of the US government? They will be eternally grateful.

... that more money allocated to the 'defense' budget is a good thing.

There is a big difference between the act of allocating more money to a budget, and having the capability to do so because you're being more efficient. Which was my point.

Re: Census Bureau's American FactFinder software cost taxpayers $33.3 million

#118

Post by sliverstorm »

freehunter wrote: post #36
Mizza wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I'd love to do that, I think casting a broad net in FOIA is very difficult and potentially counterproductive. FOIA offices have very limited resources already, so asking for literally everything at once or as lots of little requests performs a DoS attack on the one office of the government that I really like! It does make a good point philosophically, but practically, I think it might be counterproductive.…

Or a better solution, everything that's eligible for a FOIA request should just be made available on the existing Open Government page [1] rather than making people request it and go through the process. What is the point of this security by obscurity nonsense? If it can be released under FOIA, there's no reason to not release it without a FOIA request. [1] http://www.whitehouse.gov/open

there's no reason to not release it without a FOIA request.

How about the cost of digging up that information? Or the effort to ensure each piece of information released is indeed safe for release? Or the effort to put it all together in a coherent set?

The government has a TON of records. Releasing them is not as simple as picking the "public" checkbox in the settings pane.

There might also be a general concern that if someone had access to the entire database of records, they could mine that database and start to infer other information that is not supposed to be known. This sort of tactic has been used in wars past. Compiling supply chain records to infer troop movements, for example.

Re: Census Bureau's American FactFinder software cost taxpayers $33.3 million

#119

Post by redcap »

MBCook wrote: post #113
wpietri wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's less reason to fear that. Some of the best parts of government are the science- and data-driven ones, and evidence-based medicine provides a lot of data. Plus, doctors are notoriously independent. Personally, I'd feel much better about government-run healthcare than for-profit-insurer-run healthcare. At least with the government option, everybody works for me, either directly or indirectly. Plus, a bu…

I really like single payer in theory, but I'm with briandear on this one. There is already enough monkeying with what Medicare should and shouldn't pay for. My fear is the more money is involved, the less science/data/evidence based the decisions will be. That's why I'm torn on the whole thing. I think for-profit should be able to do it better, but the current system clearly isn't structured in a way that encourages…

If (most of) the rest of the developed world can do "socialized" medicine reasonably well, then what's so special about the US that would prevent this? Just the size and scale for fuckups?

There are occasional health system scandals in Australia and the UK, for example, but even with this everyone gets coverage. So why the US needs to drag its heels in this is beyond me.

But if you do think the public service will make a dog's breakfast over the whole thing, I'm all ears.

Re: Census Bureau's American FactFinder software cost taxpayers $33.3 million

#120

Post by nateabele »

redcap wrote: post #119
MBCook wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really like single payer in theory, but I'm with briandear on this one. There is already enough monkeying with what Medicare should and shouldn't pay for. My fear is the more money is involved, the less science/data/evidence based the decisions will be. That's why I'm torn on the whole thing. I think for-profit should be able to do it better, but the current system clearly isn't structured in a way that encourages…

If (most of) the rest of the developed world can do "socialized" medicine reasonably well, then what's so special about the US that would prevent this? Just the size and scale for fuckups? There are occasional health system scandals in Australia and the UK, for example, but even with this everyone gets coverage. So why the US needs to drag its heels in this is beyond me. But if you do think the public service will ma…

Okay, to be clear though, exactly which segment(s) of the developed world are doing socialized medicine and not going bankrupt (or on the verge of going bankrupt) in spectacular fashion?
Post reply on HN