aFireInside Posted October 22, 2013 Posted October 22, 2013 Build a complex program that will solve the worlds problems without an incentive to make money! Look at the Obama care website!
STer Posted October 22, 2013 Posted October 22, 2013 The Obamacare website is the opposite isn't it? They probably paid people exponentially more to create it than they should have, not less. Or am I misunderstanding?
Alan C. Posted October 22, 2013 Posted October 22, 2013 Good enough for government work? The contractors building Obamacare The Obama administration dreamed that its health insurance exchanges -- the websites that were supposed to make it easy to buy health insurance -- would function as smoothly as online consumer sites like Expedia or Amazon.com. But as head-scratching continues about how a famously web-savvy administration could have flubbed its Internet homework so badly, an examination by the Sunlight Foundation shows the administration turned the task of building its futuristic new health care technology planning and programming over to legacy contractors with deep political pockets.One result: Problem-plagued online exchanges that make it all but impossible for consumers to buy insurance and hundreds of millions of dollars in the coffers of some of the biggest lobbying powerhouses in Washington.Citing the government shutdown, the Health and Human Services Department will not release a list of the estimated dozen or more companies tasked with building the site. But Sunlight reviewed contract award information from USASpending.gov and FedBizOpps.gov, and found 47 organizations that won contracts from Health and Human Services or the Treasury Department to manage, support or service the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Among them were top contractors like Northrop Grumman, Deloitte LLP, SAIC Inc. General Dynamics and Booz Allen Hamilton. All five of those companies provided information technology services to either the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services or the Internal Revenue Service, the two agencies tasked with building back components of the health insurance exchanges.All but one of of the 47 contractors who won contracts to carry out work on the Affordable Care Act worked for the government prior to its passage. Many -- like the Rand Corporation and the MITRE Corporation -- have done so for decades. And some, like Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics, are among the biggest wielders of influence in Washington. Some 17 ACA contract winners reported spending more than $128 million on lobbying in 2011 and 2012, while 29 had employees or political action committees or both that contributed $32 million to federal candidates and parties in the same period. Of that amount, President Obama collected $3.9 million.
Charles Turner Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 Can we just call the TZM what it is : Technocracy. And like the technocracy movement from the 1930 (which was born out of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW)) has the obvious under tones of marxism. The efficiency objective of the movement is impossible as there will always be varying parameters that can not be constrained. Think of the idea of designing the most effcient ship to deliver materials or goods from china to the USA. Now the slower a ship moves the less resistance it has, so a ship travelling at 4 knots will use less fuel over a given distance, compared to a ship at 8 knots. But you would need 2 ships at 4 knots to match the ship at 8 knots. So is it better to get the extra steel and materials to build another ship vs a faster ship, needing a whole extra crew as well. But how much materials do you want to move in one go? 100,000 tonnes, 500,000 tonnes, 30 million tonnes? A larger ship uses less fuel as any doubling the volume of a ship (and therefore capacity) does not require require a doubling of surface area of the hull. Also a longer ship has less wave drag. Wave drag is only a function of length and velocity. Would it be ok to wait 1 year between sailings to get the scale of effciency of a larger ship. Should you make a longer ship even if it uses more materials. What material should you use? Steel, aluminium, carbon fibre (this can only be decided by avaliablity as you could use all the worlds carbon fibre on one ship). It is impossible to create a ship using formulas to decide on parameters, you must make arbitrary decisions with regard to sailing schedules (and thus sailing speed, sailing schedule must be decided by how quickly people want goods and materials, this desire for quick goods can not be determined by any non-market function and thus effciency can not be determined), ship parameters such as sailing scedules will also decided capacities such as tonnage. Only once these decisions have been made can a ship design be optomised. Even then it is an iterative process and after a few iterations a design is picked as the iterative process could go on for ever (even excluding new techonogies and their changes). If a single ship can not be optomised then the process is impossible. Imagine trying an impossible process like this, then evaluating how much of the earths resources should be allocated for this project againsts all other 20,000+ ships, compared to all the worlds planes, trains trucks (we haven't even left the field of transportation and it would require a simulateneus equation of near infinte size in both directions) Hope this adds fuel to the fire. Charles
tasmlab Posted October 25, 2013 Posted October 25, 2013 On the website, his CAMPAIGN team probably could've pulled it off flawlessly. I sent the Obama campaign (and the Romney campaign) three dollars to be put into their marketing machine. Their web/mobile/email machine was pretty well oiled.
STer Posted October 26, 2013 Posted October 26, 2013 On the website, his CAMPAIGN team probably could've pulled it off flawlessly. I sent the Obama campaign (and the Romney campaign) three dollars to be put into their marketing machine. Their web/mobile/email machine was pretty well oiled. You sent the Obama and Romney teams each $3 to put into marketing? Why did you do that?
tasmlab Posted November 7, 2013 Posted November 7, 2013 You sent the Obama and Romney teams each $3 to put into marketing? Why did you do that? To waste their money of course! Romney sent me huge packages for months, including several handsome 8x10 photos of him standing by a barn. I wouldn't be surprised if he spent $100 sending me campaign material. Obama wasn't nearly as aggressive. I just got a sticker and a few letters and never-ending email. I also wanted to hear the direct messages they were sending. And it was good info for cocktail parties and the like.
Recommended Posts