The Obamacare website that we can’t use only cost us $634 million
1–6 of 6 posts
Re: The Obamacare website that we can’t use only cost us $634 million
#2This seems preposterous. I'm mainly interested in how this "fact" became a talking point, and how far and fast it spreads.
Re: The Obamacare website that we can’t use only cost us $634 million
#3This seems preposterous. I'm mainly interested in how this "fact" became a talking point, and how far and fast it spreads.
Ok, but IMO HN isn't really the right place for politically charged blogspam like this.
Re: The Obamacare website that we can’t use only cost us $634 million
#4This seems preposterous. I'm mainly interested in how this "fact" became a talking point, and how far and fast it spreads.
This article has little content in it, and I can't even parse which side of the debate you're trying to stake a claim to in this follow-up comment, though you seem to be very firmly on whatever side that is. Regardless of which side that may be, though, it seems appropriate to ask you if have more evidence than the word "preposterous" and some scare quotes around the word "fact".
You really need to work on your political rabble-rousing.
Re: The Obamacare website that we can’t use only cost us $634 million
#5"those saying the federal heath insurance exchange cost $634 million are incorrect. The official said this figure includes all of the company’s contracts for a Health and Human Services Department program over the last seven years"
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/10/rumor-check-obama...
Still appears to be $100M+ ...
Re: The Obamacare website that we can’t use only cost us $634 million
#6This seems preposterous. I'm mainly interested in how this "fact" became a talking point, and how far and fast it spreads.
This article has little content in it, and I can't even parse which side of the debate you're trying to stake a claim to in this follow-up comment, though you seem to be very firmly on whatever side that is. Regardless of which side that may be, though, it seems appropriate to ask you if have more evidence than the word "preposterous" and some scare quotes around the word "fact". You really need to work on your polit…
"Fact" because I can't tell if it's true. (I'll confess I have great doubt.) "Preposterous" because it doesn't seem possible a web site would cost that much. Relevant to HN because it's about a web site, and the readers here are well positioned to evaluate how such a thing might actually be true.
I was worried it might appear so, but I was not trying to rabble-rouse. Sorry if you mistook my intentions.