Obama Calls on Private Sector IT Pros to fix HealthCare.gov

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.


If the price went up for some that's because 50 million Americans used to be uninsured (and many millions of others, including IT contractors, underinsured, many being unaware of that fact until they have an accident or get sick). In any other country in the world people would roll their eyes at you for complaining about the price increase. Yet in the US it's apparently normal for people to want a discount at the expense of other people's lives.

 

That over-simplifies the positions of the two parties. In reality both want large government spending, they just want the spending in different areas. Republicans want large spending on the military and waging various wars around the world. Democrats want large spending on healthcare and education.

Republicans are somewhat contradictory, saying that government should stay out of people's lives but then try to institute laws that would for example force women who want abortions to undergo a trans-vaginal ultrasound. So they want government to be deeply involved in women's health issues rather than prioritizing the freedom of the individual.

Republicans want to ensure that everyone has to register with a government issued ID in order to be able to vote (so that less poor people will be able to vote), but they will fight tooth and nail to prevent any sort of registration requirement for buying a gun.

Many republicans are also religious but seem to conveniently overlook Jesus's teaching on healing the sick, giving to the poor, turning the other cheek and thou shall not kill...

The positions are so contradictory and illogical in many cases that it's not surprising that these issues are so confusing to both Americans and non-americans.
 


Yes, because, no where in the Private Sector does this sort of thing ever happen. Sim City 5000 was freaking perfect when it launched and no one had problems logging on or long wait times to download .... nope no one was offered money returned for their inconvenience. None of that happened, ever.

Your comment is exactly why nothing gets moving these days in Washington you are so ideological you see the world through a lens that doesn't exist. Guess what same isht happens to private companies and $400 million wasn't spent on simply the site, moreover, private contracting companies built the site in the first place, the government directly employees very few people they bid out to the private sector on nearly everything including the building of this site.

This lala land of private world vs government means nothing because the US government contracts nearly everything it does to the private sector. Either way the article is false, the contract which was already given to a private sector company, is now being opened to hire a "sub-contractor" to the prime contractor to help fix it.
 


The price went down for many. I hate the health care debate because so few have bothered to do any real research and no isht about what they are saying.
 


Yes, because PRISM was a complete failure. What are you people talking about? And e-File can't be any easier???

I'm not saying the government is perfect but people act as though the government is just complete and utterly clueless, the fact, I the US does many things extremely efficiently. And more over th eprivate sector does most of the governments work ... they are contracted to do so. People act as though the government is a direct employer , it's not at all, for most nearly everything it does.

 


Man there are so many wrong comments in this I don't know where to start.

1) The private sector built the site to begin with, the government gives out contracts to the private sector for nearly everything it does, does the government build fighters, no it hires boing to do it, it gives them the contract. Firms bid on doing the work for the healthcare.gov, the exchange plans are administered by private insurers, etc ...

2) The issue is not the sign-on process it's the volume and it happens all the time, let's see, Warcraft online and Sim City come to mind as recent examples. Again though the hardware , the development again was managed by private sector companies, they are simply looking for another vendor outside of the prime contractor who has it now.

3) Uhm ... the government already runs one of the most efficient healthcare programs on the planet as examined by independent parties, Medicare, contrary to popular belief they aren't new to the game,... finally, the government isn't running the US healthcare system in the ACA, they are broadening the base of people insured to hopefully lower cost and are requiring states to be setup healthcare exchanges via private insurers.

Anyway, I don't even know why I bother to get into this debate because it's so few actually know what the f ... they are talking about in it.
 
To our European friend: It has to do with the Constitution and the role of government. We are supposed to be a republic, with 50 soveign and independent states. We are supposed to worry more about our state governments, where we as individual citizens have more of a voice, than the national government. Our Founders understood that centralized power was threat to freedom, so they create a Constitution with specific enumerated powers for government. The federal government is supposed to limit itself ONLY to those powers. All other powers belong to the states. The federal government is supposed to do little more than focus on defense, currency, treaties, interstate trade, patents, and taxation. So programs that fall out of that are essentially unconstitutinal. A big government apologist would say that the Supreme Court has ruled it Constitutional. I would say that the SC has a long history of incorrect rulings such as Dredd Scott, Filburn, etc.

Those of us who oppose this law oppose it based on the role of government. It doesn't mean we don't want to help others. We just don't believe that government is the way to help anyone and we especially oppose the usurpation of power when representatives violate their oath by advocating for laws that fall outside of their enumerated powers.

We are supposed to have a system where a state can enact all the welfare, social security, and healthcare programs that its own citizens desire. NONE of those programs belong at he federal level, per our Constitution and the intent of our founding fathers. All of this is spelled out in the Federalist Papers.

Usurpation of power puts us on the road to tyranny and goernment control of our healthcare means government control of our bodies.

So there you have it. That's the answer from an educated immigrant and veteran who associates with the Tea Party that gets demonized so much.
 
One problem would be willing private sector IT pro's working on this shame of a website. Having worked for the government at one point I can tell you this: ALL HAIL THE PRIVATE SECTOR!. The amount of red tape you have to deal with in regards to government is insane. Nothing in the private sector even comes close to the bureaucratic non-sense you get with government.

As for the whole European healthcare compared to what the U.S. is "trying" to do, one has to understand that the two system of health care are different, that is not say there are not similarities.; they are also implemented differently, and the system of government and how it operates is different as well. So taking that into account what works for Europe may not work for the U.S. and vice versa.
 
This website was coordinated by the same type of people you have to deal with at the DMV or the post office. Is anyone the least bit surprised this is how the website turned out? Just wait until one of these people are in charge of finding you a kidney.
 


So how exactly are Wyoming or Alaska going to provide affordable healthcare on their own? If it's all up to the states you're asking people from poor states to choose between their job in their state and having healthcare coverage in another state. The whole notion of federal tyranny is alien to non-Americans, especially since some states in the US have populations bigger than that of medium-sized countries (why isn't California a tyranny if it's basically as powerful as half the US states combined?) Anyway most living constitutions are far younger than the US constitution and even the US constitution has changed a lot: there are now federal taxes, women can vote, slavery and segregation have been abolished, and gay people are finally getting real rights, there is no point in calling the constitution sacred, it's there to be changed by changing times if a consistent and diverse majority wants to do so. Opposition to federal healthcare laws needs to be based on arguments that show why exactly this is so much worse than all kinds of other powers the government has "usurped", also it would be nice if people left out all the diversionary tactics of yelling about communism, marxism and death panels, don't you think? An honest debate would be the tea party proposing to destroy medicare, medicaid and the EMTALA act along with the ACA act and letting the people vote on that. If they reject that proposal then apparently a majority of Americans is OK with the federal government "usurping" the power to do something with healthcare. Then it is time to let people vote on different ideas for government regulated (or even government run) healthcare. The only problem is the tea party (and republicans pretending to represent the tea party) are under the delusion they'd win that first vote, while their strategists and lobbyists know better and keep inventing new tools to avoid an actual vote.
 


The DMVs are run by the state and the post office is its own entity. A better comparison would be with the people who managed to set up a system that spies on pretty much the entire world (and stayed undetected for years).

 
@JonathanR, many Americans have unfortunately bought into the idea that the old healthcare system isn't deeply flawed. The "full private sector" model is disastrous for many Americans... just Google for 'american medical bankruptcy'. Further, the old health model made it harder for people to try different employment models. Do lots of contracting? Want to be self-employed? But you're over 40? Your options were to pay ridiculously high premiums or go without. Now people have better options.

You're not wrong that a lot of the trouble was the implementation model; if we'd just expanded Medicare (which actually works quite well), that would have been much easier to implement. But that would have been a "single payer" system and "socialism" apparently.

The comparisons to big game launches are somewhat apt, but that ignores the fact that this system has to aggregate data across hundreds of different systems, and deals with different and complex regulations from many different states. Big Data companies like Google and Facebook are great at scale, but their systems are only as complex as they want them to be, and can add complexity over time; not an option here. The government procurement model makes things worse, but this was always going to be a rocky start.
 
In an actual "Free market" health care system, we're all screwed. If the insurance companies are allowed to pick and choose who they insure, as they've been allowed to do, we have the same end result. Those that actually NEED the insurance, being unable to get it. The gov't has previously had no control over health care costs. That's why a simple trip to the ER can easily bankrupt so many people.
 



First, the NSA is just as much its own entity as the post office, perhaps more so.

Most importantly, the idea that the NSA has stayed undetected is just laughable. Just because CNN, MSNBC, FOX hadn't talked about them hardly means they went undetected. It just means the American public are idiots.
 
The government got ripped off. 400million for a joke of a website??? Are they serious??? It doesn't even look that complicated compared to a miriad of other websites already seeing that kind of traffic every day. It's just a bunch of questionaires which input data into some kind of form, then a calculator that spits out how much OBAMA money you get, and plan prices to go with it.

Why the F did the government pay a foreign company for this website??? We have plenty of companies domestically that could have built it!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's an outrage in itself.

Strong-arming people to overpay for healthcare is very immoral in the eyes of the founding fathers. Democrats get away with it because it's a "tax", when has no real regulation under the constitution. It's still wrong. A typical retail worker, probably makes about $25k a year working full time. He's living paycheck to paycheck, barely able to afford his apartment, car insurance, groceries, and car. Now he's gotta struggle to make roughly $100 a month even after subsidies for catastrophic insurance that he doesn't need. And still have to pay for his doctors visits and prescriptions until he reaches his $6300 a year deductible or risk paying a tax of $250 for the first year and $700 a year after 2015. That's BS!!!!

I think once the sticker shock sets in in 2016, many people will jump ship to vote republican in the next election. I know i am, and i hate republicans, but in this case, i think they're right.
 


I purposefully made the position simple, so an outsider with no knowledge of our system could understand it. (As, at the root of our system, that is what the two parties call for. The reality may be different.)

Now, for my opinionated post:

The Republicans will not stop until the main people that back their party, the wealthy (money) and voters that back the party (those hot topic issues) have dismantled almost every social program the USA has. Cut payments to retirees, cut payments to the healthcare system for the poor, don't allow universal health care to be implemented... . (And, before someone says that the universal health care system was flawed because it wasn't universal, this is the fault of Republican state governments. They had a legally right position, but it doesn't change the fact that they took the universal out of universal health care.)

The Democrats, for their part, seem to be positioning the country down the path of "forever deficit spending." Spend, spend, spend... with no fiscal accountability. Social programs cost money, lots of money, and the USA's tax system/base, along with things like free trade, illegal immigration, stratification between the rich and poor increasing, the USA's changing position in the global political & economical stages over the past ~60-70 years... all make a system that over the long run will not work. (We, as a superpower, are collapsing just like the Soviet Union did, the empires of the European countries centuries ago, many empires that rules over various parts of the world centuries to many centuries ago.) Coupled with the fact that many military bases are based in Republican states, any Democrat (from one of those districts) that wishes to keep his post must also back the military, the building of more military weapons by manufacturers, ... .

Someone else, above, stated the problem easily. Lobbyists and their money. Lobbyists (and / or their backers, via other means) donate to election campaigns, and no matter a politician's party, they accept money from one group or another and then back laws the lobbyists will agree with. (And, with the distinct possibility that soon, companies will be given the same rights as individuals, ... they will have free speech, the ability to donate as much money to politicians as they want, the ability to sue "living" people for slander, ...)

The hopeful solution would be the removal of any organization, non-profit or for-profit, to make campaign contributions to politicians. A very strict limit on the amount that an individual person can give would also be put into place. The world runs on money. If politicians had to be accountable to people, instead of money, then things would be different. (Implement a recall system for almost all political postings, and things would also greatly be for the better.)

Unfortunately, I believe the only solution remaining is both political parties being replaced by others. Remove the backbone of both organizations, and start anew. Both are basically the same now, just pandering one set of issues or another to stay in power.
 
Hmm, so Obama realizes the government can't build a web site and needs the private sector to do it right. Where is the realization about health care and to let the private sector do it right?
 


Finally, another person who sees the real problem. One that unfortunately I doubt will ever change and will be the downfall of the country. Here's a wonderful example of how far bribing has gone, for anyone else curious. If only the founding fathers had put stricter regulations in the constitution and abroad to limit what Congress can do (these annual pay check increases are ridiculous, we can all agree). Then who's to say it'd work, since they'd try to change it...but hey, what if?

Anyways, I'm awaiting the dispersal of the middle class, which I am apart of, due to the gaffe of politicians and their "King", the corporations. I still don't doubt that we will actually default as a country very soon, and end up in more of a mess economically like the rest of the world.

Quote me on this, I don't really care, but sure, I'd like to be proven wrong in 10 to 40 years that Obamacare is a mistake. But based on multiple experiences with England's system, and Canada's system, as well as family who have dealt with both for many years, I can't help but be pessimistic. Just returned from Sherbrooke, Quebec from a visit with family, and the latest is ~48% of their pay checks goes to taxes. They're looking to increase it, and impose new tax as well to pay for the socialized medicine and programs/benefits. Not to mention that they're government also stipends parents who have children under 18 each year. Oh well...
 
"Yet in the US it's apparently normal for people to want a discount at the expense of other people's lives."

Yet in Gulli's country it's apparently normal for people to want free stuff at the expense of other people's money and labor. Not that the US is doing much better on that front. But like the saying goes, "You think it's expensive now, wait until it is free."
 


Actually in my country everyone pays taxes and healthcare premiums, they also pay a capped amount for drugs or emergency care, it's a lot like the ACA. But, people on minimum wage don't pay for their coverage entirely (because they couldn't pay for food and the rent otherwise) and rich people pay a little more, if that bothers you, if you'd rather see young people on minimum wage die from appendicitis, or some infection, like people in Somalia or people in the dark ages, then that's your opinion, but don't pretend people get free stuff and average Joe gets ripped off for it because average Joe is exactly who wouldn't be able to afford premiums entirely, at least for some stage in his life, even if some magic of the free market lowers costs by 50% (something just about every expert and economist in the world agrees would not happen).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom