- Joined
- Feb 21, 2012
- Messages
- 37,348
- Reaction score
- 10,645
- Location
- US Southwest
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Drudgz is reporting the cost to build the Obama-Care website is 635 BILLION ??
NO PETE, the article Drudge links to is saying the cost was 635 BILLION, not million.
650 million.. big difference. That is 13 million per state, or a bit over 2 bucks a citizen.. hardly massive.
NO PETE, the article Drudge links to is saying the cost was 635 BILLION, not million.
It doesn't seem possible.
And you can justify down any expense and your Govt ripping you off if you quantify the expense on a per capita basis.
But it doesn't change the fact they're still ripping you off.
I just googled California Exchange and got right in to the website, put in my zip, and went to a page where I can compare plans, no glitches, no problem.
Has this problem been fixed?
If so, why is anyone even talking about it at this point?
The main exchange that is maintained by the federal government covers 34 states and it's still broken last I checked a couple hours ago.
Maybe California is just ahead of the game.
It linked to a website that reported a 9 digit number.
And it may be a typo indeed, but you're still qualifying a 635 million dollar expense by basing it on a per-capita basis.
Its a bit hypocritical for you to call drudge dishonest, don't you think ?
Oh yeah right, all the Drudge commentaries and op-eds are idiotic.DRUDGE REPORT 2014®
Then you are being fooled, or Drudge did a massive typo (not the first time) to piss people like you off.
How about just staying away from that idiotic site?
To build the 635 Million dollar Web-Site that doesn't work ?
CGI Group was the CANADIAN Contractor who sold Obama a 404 error for 635 MILLION dollars.
Unbelievable.
Shipping masses of IT work out of the US is OK as long as Obama's doing it.
Their parent company was fired by the Canadians after failing to successfully set up a medical records website. Three years late and still not working.
Nice that we checked references, huh?
Canadian officials fired IT firm behind troubled Obamacare website | WashingtonExaminer.com
It also says the contract was for 87 million not 635 million.
Oh, then it's okay.
While I'd prefer the business be kept within the States I really don't have a problem with a Canadian firm. It does seem someone should have checked their references. In the real world a manager's head would roll for such an error in judgment but I suppose the responsible hiring party will be promoted and transferred.
:roll:
Thom Paine
Well technically it was the Canadian firm bought the American IT firm that had all the government contracts.
Well what that means is the actual website is cheaper than thought but it also means 548 million was probably lost in bureaucracy in somewhere.
Wait...I thought it was $635 BILLION!!!!!
And you mean a PRIVATE CONTRACTOR was hired?!?!!?!
Govt just can't do ANYTHING right!!!
Ahaaa ! The thlot pickens.... :lol: In any undertaking "what can go wrong, will go wrong". The U.S. gub'mnt braintrust lacks awareness of real life situations and didn't allow for near certain glitches. Some may blame the business, maybe rightfully, but I lean toward the need to dismiss the braintrust.
The U.S. might also consider thanking the Canadian firm for keeping some U.S. ITs employed (if in fact they did).
Have a great day, Carjosse
Thom Paine
For God's sake it is million, not billion.
That difference is three zeros.
Cripe!
That purchased the US company that has the contract work.A Canadian private contractor.
Canadian ownership....is overseas?Should you be complaining about US jobs going overseas or something ?
Especially you, you thought it was $635 BILLION.And NO ONE, thinks that web-site cost 635 million dollars.
As soon as you get your decimal place set, I'm sure you will find some story on some RW site.....that will get the story wrong....and then eventually the whole story will come together....and you will shown as wrong...again. It nearly always goes like that.Are you curious at all where the rest of the money went ?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?