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

USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

usafacts.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 359 posts

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#111

Post by [deleted] »

BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #95
iplaw wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the trend line generation, not the data. The start and end points are the same between the two graphs. To say that this nitpick throws shade on the entire project is a bit overstated.

It's the trend line generation, not the data. What you just said doesn't make any sense and is a post-hoc rationalization besides. The start and end points are the same between the two graphs. Actually they are not. The starting numbers (1980) differ between the two charts by ~500,000 deaths. To say that this nitpick throws shade on the entire project is a bit overstated. My very first search on the data came up with…

[deleted]

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#112

Post by javajosh »

dandare wrote: post #70

Dear USA Facts team, we would like to offer you few hints for public spending visualizations based on our experience. We are the creators of https://us.wikibudgets.org/w/united-states-budget-2016 . - Government spending is only a small part of the public finance. People need to see all public organisations: states and cities, departments, offices, bureaus and agencies, schools, hospital and prisons and obviously all…

How deeply did you delve into the site? You should look at the "10-K 2017" report, linked at the bottom of the page, first. http://usafacts.org/resources/USAFacts_10-K_2017.PDF

I believe this addresses (at least) your first two points. And moreover, it is a remarkable document because it reads something like an anatomical description of the organism.

Your point about world finance is strange: That is not what this thing is. The same for your wiki idea. Both good ideas, but why would this be a point of criticism?

BTW I don't even know what an OG tag is, so I'm not sure what you mean there.

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#113

Post by xienze »

Cshelton wrote: post #106

I'm seeing many things (if this data is accurate, which assuming it is as it's from all government sources) and trends that go against a large percentage of what the media on both sides are perpetuating. That is my first takeaway at a glance. My second takeaway at a glance is the giant problem that is Social Security. It's been said over and over, and the aggregation of more data into charts comes to the same conclus…

> We would have a budget surplus if we actually made Social Security/other Gov. retirement program replacement actually sustain itself perpetually. What. A. Concept.

The problem is that there are a lot of people who believe that SS isn't broken because you can simply increase retirement age, make people pay in more, and other assorted band-aids. SS will be "solvent" until it suddenly isn't, and people need to realize that.

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#114

Post by 0xfeba »

jrodthree24 wrote: post #86
abraves10001 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While it is more than a bit absurd it doesn't work with https, I am not sure the "s" provides much fact verification.

It doesn't verify the facts but it helps to verify the source as in making sure you are actually connected to this site.

They just have a domain validation cert. That doesn't mean much, other than your communication with the site is secure. And there's HTTP resources being pulled in invalidating most of that security. Bonus derp points for being a COMODO cert.

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#115

Post by cookiecaper »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #83
peterwwillis wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain the obsession people have with the Constitution? It seems like some people believe all new laws shouldn't exist if they're not in the Constitution.

The Constitution limits the Federal government. One can therefore say that government programs that are outside the scope stated by the Constitution are outside the legitimate scope of the Federal government. The Tenth Amendment is pretty clear: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Now, I kno…

Beyond the intent, the plain meaning of the text is clear. If the power is not explicitly enumerated as belonging to the federal government, it is reserved to the states. At most, this would allow the federal government to implement a policy based on a non-enumerated power, which state legislatures could then override. Only powers explicitly enumerated would be binding across the Union.

Telecommunication has really changed the way the world works with respect to all of this, and made us care much more about the federal government than the state governments that are, on paper, supposed to be much more powerful.

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#116

Post by lewis500 »

I was suuuper excited about this. But this site is cringeworthy, even for a beta, given they spent $10 million on this effort.

For one, the division into the constitutional categories is kind of awkward; most people would just like to see by function or department. When the drafters of the constitution wrote these clauses into the constitution, they had no sense that one day the government would be so large or do so many things. It is anachronistic to impose these clauses on a modern state. If everything the government does is somehow serving some role in the US constitution, isn't it kind of funny that virtually all democratic countries provide more or less the same services? The only major difference between the US, with its special constitution, and other democracies' spending is that the US government only directly provides health insurance to about half the population, and the US government spends more on defense and security. I don't think that difference is because of the constitution, but rather historical/cultural factors and randomness. So the application of the constitution simply reflects some kind of delusion on Ballmer's part.

Second, the data is sloppily put together. There is a line for "Social insurance administration" which includes federal and local employees but has no combined federal and local total. Then there is another line for "Social Insurance Administration (federal)" which has no federal/local breakdown but has a total. So are there no local social insurance workers? Why not just put everything in one line?

Third, this is almost entirely data you could get from the federal reserve's FRED system. In some cases you might need to go to the OECD site or the BLS site. But I'm left wondering: how did they spend years on this? This is more like an extended hackathon project. The data vis really sucks, too.

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#117

Post by usefulcat »

velodrome wrote: post #74
tcbawo wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those prone to confirmation bias, commentary and interpretation of data can be counterproductive. The fact that Ballmer is purposefully not setting an agenda makes this more powerful. Otherwise people tend to accumulate their own set of convenient facts.

> The fact that Ballmer is purposefully not setting an agenda makes this more powerful. Yes, I agree. > Otherwise people tend to accumulate their own set of convenient facts. I think people will do this anyway...are we not human?

> I think people will do this anyway...are we not human?

Yes, but that's not relevant. The point is that there's nothing to be gained by encouraging that behavior.

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#119

Post by code_duck »

killjoywashere wrote: post #102
accountyaccount wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wife: These kids in rural Alabama could really use some food Steve: Did you know school teachers are one of the largest groups of federal employees?

There are stories of doctors prescribing food to malnourished children and Medicaid refusing to pay, saying "Food is not medicine."

That makes sense to me since there are other programs which exist specifically to provide food assistance.

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#120

Post by rdiddly »

neap24 wrote: post #41
lloydde wrote: post #30

"USAFacts was inspired by a conversation Steve Ballmer had with his wife. She wanted him to get more involved in philanthropic work. He thought it made sense to first find out what government does with the money it raises." Had anyone made the comic strip version? Wife: it breaks my heart to hear about the many suffering Americans. We can't take our money with us when we die, let's help our fellow Americans? Steve: t…

I get the joke, but in all seriousness we probably need both types of people in the world. Some who take immediate action and others who prepare the way for more informed action.

Joking aside, it's eminently normal, if you're setting out to help people, to ask first where your help might do the most good. And when attempting to answer that question, if you find that nobody has bothered to collect the data, it's normal to proceed to collect the data. The effort itself is philanthropy, and it forms a foundation for future philanthropy.
Post reply on HN