Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

lets be fair.....the rollout was a total screw up

5 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

2seaoat



The website is a failure. I have adobe professional which I use in my business. I can create a form in 10 minutes which can capture data and put the same on an excel spread sheet on the back end. If you link the data fields to a sequel server database there is little or no restriction on concurrent users.

The website presented was illogical and clearly showed that the developers were not professionals with experience. The government bidding process is flawed where the cheapest price does not bring the quality which is required. This was a 600 million dollar bid, and if this was turned over to a google, amazon, or yahoo the result would have been a working emcommerce site delivered on time with proper logic on the web interface.

This type of SNAFU is happening regularly in government. It is time to really to question how bids are secured by government......the system is broken.

I have a friend who is a defense contractor. The generals came to him through 400k paid to a lobbyist and they spec a machine for the defense department. They bid it after they have guided my friend to design the machine and build a prototype which met all their specs. The prior provider for the machine billed defense over a 100k for the machine. My friend asks them what should I bid, and they say the same as the big defense contractor. He wins based on the specs which his machine was the only one who met them. He now puts 80k profit in his pocket on every machine, and they have ordered over 240. The system of bidding is broken. The system of lobbyist and the connections which secure bids from government is broken. We could easily save 15% of expenditures of this country if this topic was a priority. Some think this is about Obama.....it is rather indicative of a broken and corrupt bidding system which is making some rich and killing the American taxpayer.

Nekochan

Nekochan

2seaoat wrote:The website is a failure.   I have adobe professional which I use in my business.  I can create a form in 10 minutes which can capture data and put the same on an excel spread sheet on the back end.   If you link the data fields to a sequel server database there is little or no restriction on concurrent users.

The website presented was illogical and clearly showed that the developers were not professionals with experience.   The government bidding process is flawed where the cheapest price does not bring the quality which is required.  This was a 600 million dollar bid, and if this was turned over to a google, amazon, or yahoo the result would have been a working emcommerce site delivered on time with proper logic on the web interface.  

This type of SNAFU is happening regularly in government.  It is time to really to question how bids are secured by government......the system is broken.

I have a friend who is a defense contractor.   The generals came to him through 400k paid to a lobbyist and they spec a machine for the defense department.   They bid it after they have guided my friend to design the machine and build a prototype which met all their specs.  The prior provider for the machine billed defense over a 100k for the machine.  My friend asks them what should I bid, and they say the same as the big defense contractor.   He wins based on the specs which his machine was the only one who met them.  He now puts 80k profit in his pocket on every machine, and they have ordered over 240.   The system of bidding is broken.   The system of lobbyist and the connections which secure bids from government is broken.   We could easily save 15% of expenditures of this country if this topic was a priority.   Some think this is about Obama.....it is rather indicative of a broken and corrupt bidding system which is making some rich and killing the American taxpayer.
This is what my son said two weeks ago.  

However, it's my understanding from a couple of other posters on this forum that this was a no-bid contract.  Now, if it was a no-bid contract and a qualified company got the job, that might be ok.  But...whatever process they used to hire the company for this job, and for whatever reason  the decision was made....this needs to be questioned.  Someone needs to answer for this.

2seaoat



This is a historic opportunity for both sides who are fed up with government inefficiency to get down to the real problem. The game is rigged. In our attempt to eliminate patronage and corruption we have designed a system which rewards former employees of government departments who act as lobbyist and often work in conjunction with their former colleagues to determine the specs for a bid. This is simply wrong.

In my friends case, the lobbyist was a son of a very well known politician in Washington. He was shocked how this system works and how unlimited his profit can be in this bidding process.

First, our defense department is encouraging products which are made in the USA. This is a good thing. The supply chain in war is going to be a problem if our products are all foreign made. He has a machine shop which builds the component parts for his other company which manufacturers the testing machine the military had spec with him.

I have no problem with the Defense department creating seed domestic suppliers.....that is good process, but the lobbyist being paid 400k, and the obscene profits which are left on the table by government is the central problem facing America. The website SNAFU is the tip of the iceberg. We need to quit arguing politics and fix these bidding systems and admit when something is screwed up. Blaming and pointing fingers does not solve the underlying problem.

Nekochan

Nekochan

I agree it needs to be fixed and it is a problem no matter what Party controls Congress and the WH. 

But I do think that someone needs to answer for this particular decision and answer as to how the decision was made.

Guest


Guest

Gosh... what do you call a corrupt collusion between a central govt and major corporations? Anyone?

2seaoat



But I do think that someone needs to answer for this particular decision and answer as to how the decision was made.

I agree 100%. Sick people and people under a great deal of stress who do not have health insurance have faced inexcusable delay. The people who are responsible should be held accountable.

cool1

cool1

Ummm--I don't think it rolled out yet Basketball 

2seaoat



Ummm--I don't think it rolled out yet Basketball

It did. It has not shown initial success. It will however be corrected and improved. Americans should be able to have real choices in health insurance which will be a few clicks away on our computers.

However, this failure of immediate success is not unique in system development, nor will the failures stop with this project. Americans will succeed. America will succeed.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:Ummm--I don't think it rolled out yet Basketball

It did. It has not shown initial success. It will however be corrected and improved. Americans should be able to have real choices in health insurance which will be a few clicks away on our computers.

However, this failure of immediate success is not unique in system development, nor will the failures stop with this project. Americans will succeed. America will succeed.
See amtrak, usps, pentagon and military contracting, solyndra, stimulus... etc. Your faith is an inspiration to us all.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

I actually spent a couple of hours at the ACA website with my daughter today looking at possible options to replace the insurance plan she currently has.

The ACA website is not a complete disaster, but could be better, faster, and easier to use.

My daughter's current insurance goes up another 24% in December, and we found a plan at the ACA website that has roughly similar coverages, but a premium that will be $10 per month cheaper than her current plan will be next year, with a deductible that is 30% lower. I think she will be going with the ACA plan. She doesn't qualify for any subsidy, so this is straight-up insurance.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

dumpcare



Those are just average rates you're seeing on healthcare.gov, an average for under 50 and then over 50.

Nekochan

Nekochan

ppaca wrote:Those are just average rates you're seeing on healthcare.gov, an average for under 50 and then over 50.
I read yesterday that many of the quotes given are wrong.

dumpcare



They may very well be through healthcare.gov, but not on the carrier's website's. The subsidy's may be off a bit.

dumpcare



http://theminorityreport.co/stixblog/files/2012/06/peggy.jpg

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

ppaca wrote:Those are just average rates you're seeing on healthcare.gov, an average for under 50 and then over 50.
I will have daughter call AETNA then and see what their silver PPO plan with a $3,500 deductible will be. It said $237 per month, and her current plan with CIGNA goes up to $247 in December.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Guest


Guest

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
ppaca wrote:Those are just average rates you're seeing on healthcare.gov, an average for under 50 and then over 50.
I will have daughter call AETNA then and see what their silver PPO plan with a $3,500 deductible will be. It said $237 per month, and her current plan with CIGNA goes up to $247 in December.
this isn't a good plan to me

Nekochan

Nekochan

Z, I am curious about what her current plan costs for this year (2013).

OK, I see you said it's going up 24%.   

So basically, with Obamacare, her rate goes up 20%+ no matter what.  And that's just next year.  Who knows how much it'll be after that.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Nekochan wrote:Z, I am curious about what her current plan costs for this year (2013).

OK, I see you said it's going up 24%.   

So basically, with Obamacare, her rate goes up 20%+ no matter what.  And that's just next year.  Who knows how much it'll be after that.
Yes, but her premium was rising every year anyway. It was $158 per month in 2009, was $199 in 2013, going to $247 in 2014. She has a $5,000 deductible. If she can get a $3,500 deductible plan with the same coverages for $237 under the ACA, that is better than what she now has.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum