$634 Million ObamaCare Website Company was Fired by Canada

So Obama took a Canadian company that Canadian officials fired for screwing up their health care website and gave it a much bigger job.


Canadian provincial health officials last year fired the parent company of CGI Federal, the prime contractor for the problem-plagued Obamacare health exchange websites, the Washington Examiner has learned.

CGI Federal’s parent company, Montreal-based CGI Group, was officially terminated in September 2012 by an Ontario government health agency after the firm missed three years of deadlines and failed to deliver the province’s flagship online medical registry.

The online registry was supposed to be up and running by June 2011.


The CMS officials refused to say if federal officials knew of its parent company’s IT failure in Canada when awarding the six contracts.

It wasn’t just those contracts. As mentioned earlier, Obama dumped huge amounts of money on CGI.


CGI Federal is a subsidiary of Montreal-based CGI Group. With offices in Fairfax, Va., the subsidiary has been a darling of the Obama administration, which since 2009 has bestowed it with $1.4 billion in federal contracts, according to USAspending.gov.

HHS is by far the single largest federal contractor of CGI, showering it with $645 million in contracts. The Defense Department pays the Canadian company $254 million, the EPA $58 million and the Justice Department $36 million.


In comparison, in 2008, under President George W. Bush, CGI contracts totaled only $16.5 million for all federal departments and agencies.

The interesting question is why Obama dumped 1.4 billion in taxpayer money on a company this incompetent and ignored all the warnings.

It’s one more thing that ought to be investigated.

A half billion dollars for a website that doesn't even fucking work?

It is sickening that these libtard fools are cheering this insane surrender of our rights to the incompetent and corrupt Machine.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

Hmm... it didn't work.. We obviously didn't pay enough money. THINGS COST MONEY! PAY IT!


My car broke down so I needed 6 new tires for my motorcycle. $5000!

This is just the regimes first spending related to ObozoCare..


It's is painful and scary to imagine how shitty and irresponsible future spending decisions will be.

They were the only bid on the contract but there were others who worked on the contract, such as Booz Allen, Northrop Grummand, General Dynamics, SAIC, etc. A lot of defense contractors on the list. 17 firms donated $128 million dollars to politicians.

Management

Meet CGI's management team in United States


George D. Schindler
President, United States and Canada


Donna Ryan
President, CGI Federal (visit CGI Federal leadership team)


Pete Ihrig
Senior Vice-President and General Manager, U.S. Enterprise Markets


Mark Boyajian
Senior Vice-President, U.S. Mid-Atlantic

Dave Delgado
Senior Vice-President, U.S. West

Dave Henderson
Senior Vice-President, U.S. Central-South

Christopher James
Senior Vice-President, IP Solutions & Onshore Delivery

Gregg Mossburg
Senior Vice-President, U.S. Northeast

eLester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They were the only bid on the contract but there
> were others who worked on the contract, such as
> Booz Allen, Northrop Grummand, General Dynamics,
> SAIC, etc. A lot of defense contractors on the
> list. 17 firms donated $128 million dollars to
> politicians.


And yet you trust themwith your healthcare, don't ya Lester?

What a model inmate you are. Maybe Warden Obama will let you paint your cell one day, I hear he's really nice.

UI looks similar to EHealthinsurance. They took the front-end from a small web design shop per Washington Post and the big government contractors got to work on the back-end.

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eLester Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > They were the only bid on the contract but
> there
> > were others who worked on the contract, such as
> > Booz Allen, Northrop Grummand, General
> Dynamics,
> > SAIC, etc. A lot of defense contractors on the
> > list. 17 firms donated $128 million dollars to
> > politicians.
>
>
> And yet you trust themwith your healthcare, don't
> ya Lester?
>
> What a model inmate you are. Maybe Warden Obama
> will let you paint your cell one day, I hear he's
> really nice.

Both Pubs and Dems have wanted to impose mandated private health insurance on the public. Hence it's hard to get upset. The Republicans might have imposed a few less mandates on policyholders, but the end result is going to be roughly the same. Their goal is to next force all public insurance programs into the hands of a few private health insurance carriers.

Obamacare's Website Is Crashing Because It Doesn't Want You To Know How Costly Its Plans Are

Avik Roy Avik Roy, Contributor

A growing consensus of IT experts, outside and inside the government, have figured out a principal reason why the website for Obamacare’s federally-sponsored insurance exchange is crashing. Healthcare.gov forces you to create an account and enter detailed personal information before you can start shopping. This, in turn, creates a massive traffic bottleneck, as the government verifies your information and decides whether or not you’re eligible for subsidies. HHS bureaucrats knew this would make the website run more slowly. But they were more afraid that letting people see the underlying cost of Obamacare’s insurance plans would scare people away.

HHS didn’t want users to see Obamacare’s true costs

Healthcare.gov was initially going to include an option to browse before registering,” report Christopher Weaver and Louise Radnofsky in the Wall Street Journal. “But that tool was delayed, people familiar with the situation said.” Why was it delayed? “An HHS spokeswoman said the agency wanted to ensure that users were aware of their eligibility for subsidies that could help pay for coverage, before they started seeing the prices of policies.”

As you know if you’ve been following this space, Obamacare’s bevy of mandates, regulations, taxes, and fees drives up the cost of the insurance plans that are offered under the law’s public exchanges. A Manhattan Institute analysis I helped conduct found that, on average, the cheapest plan offered in a given state, under Obamacare, will be 99 percent more expensive for men, and 62 percent more expensive for women, than the cheapest plan offered under the old system. And those disparities are even wider for healthy people.

The federal government’s decision to force people to apply before shopping, Weaver and Radnofsky write, “proved crucial because, before users can begin shopping for coverage, they must cross a busy digital junction in which data are swapped among separate computer systems built or run by contractors including CGI Group Inc., the healthcare.gov developer, Quality Software Services Inc., a UnitedHealth Group Inc. unit; and credit-checker Experian PLC. If any part of the web of systems fails to work properly, it could lead to a traffic jam blocking most users from the marketplace.”

Jay Angoff, a former federal official at the agency that oversees the exchange, told the Journal that he was surprised by the decision. “People should be able to get quotes” without entering all of that information upfront.

Weaver and Radnofsky say that the core problem stems from “the slate of registration systems [that] intersect with Oracle Identity Manager, a software component embedded in a government identity-checking system.” The main Healthcare.gov web page collects information using the CGI Group technology. Then that data is transferred to a system built by Quailty Software Services. QSS then sends data to Experian, the credit-history firm. But the key “identity management system” employed by QSS was designed by Oracle, and according to the Journal’s sources, the Oracle software isn’t playing nicely with the other information systems.


Oracle hotly denies these claims. “Our software is the identical product deployed in most of the world’s most complex systems…our software is running properly,” said an Oracle spokeswoman in a statement.

‘It’s awful, just awful’

Robert Pear and colleagues at the New York Times have a piece up today detailing the serious problems with the federal exchange, problems that may get worse, not better. They confirm what we already knew: that the Obama administration refused to delay the implementation of the exchanges, despite the well-known problems, because they were afraid of the political blowback. “Former government officials say the White House, which was calling the shots, feared that any backtracking would further embolden Republican critics who were trying to repeal the health care law.”

As I documented last week, IT and insurance experts have been saying for at least eight months that implementation of the exchanges was going badly, that as early as February officials were warning of a “third world experience.” The Times’ sources are just as blunt. “These are not glitches,” said one insurance executive. “The extent of the problems is pretty enormous. At the end of our [conference calls with the administration], people say, ‘It’s awful, just awful.’”

“We foresee a train wreck,” said another executive in a February interview with the Times. “We don’t have the IT specifications. The level of angst in health plans is growing by leaps and bounds. The political people in the administration do not understand how far behind they are.” Richard Foster, the former chief actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said last week that “so much testing of the new system was so far behind schedule, I was not confident it would work well.”

Henry Chao, the deputy chief information officer at CMS who made the “third world experience” comment, was told by his superiors that failure to meet the October 1 launch deadline “was not an option,” according to the Times.


White House knowingly chose to court disaster

Think about it. It’s quite possible that much of this disaster could have been avoided if the Obama administration had been willing to be open with the public about the degree to which Obamacare escalates the cost of health insurance. If they had, then a number of the problems with the exchange’s software architecture would have been avoided. But that would require admitting that the “Affordable Care Act” was not accurately named.

They knew that their people on the front lines, people like Henry Chao, were worried that the exchanges would get botched. They saw the Congressional Research Service memorandum detailing that the administration has missed half of the statutory deadlines assigned by the law. But they were more afraid of the P.R. disaster of crashing websites than they were of the P.R. disaster of disclosing Obamacare’s high premiums. What you see is the result.

Half the costs no doubt went directly into Obama's re-election campaign.

And lets not forget the public school graduates, ACORN and criminals doing the ground work for dear leaders program and have access to ALL your personal information!

.....an Obamacare navigator despite her financial history, which includes a bankruptcy in 2003, a 2007 civil charge from a local check cashing business called Midwest Checkrite for writing a bad check, being more than $1700 behind on her state tax bill, and having an outstanding arrest warrant in nearby Shawnee County.



http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/14/obamacare-navigator-in-kansas-has-outstanding-arrest-warrant/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/14/2013 05:15PM by imbiker.

What they got paid for this site is an absolute crime.

The firm where I worked when I was last directly involved in such things did the sites for many big names who you'd recognize including major sports leagues and some other very intensive sites with a ton of back-end processing, real-time data, customer interaction, and heavy traffic, etc., which start-to-finish probably took significant manpower and a couple of years each to do. So I have some appreciation for what the costs for something like this are. Had we proposed anything even remotely like what's been reported they would have absolutely fallen down laughing. Then they'd have throw our asses out of the building. And our rates were far, far, far from being anywhere even near cheap.

Had it failed as badly on launch like this has? Oh, holy shit. I don't even want to think about that. lol We definitely would have had to eat most of what we were paid if not sued beyond that. I wouldn't have even waited for the call firing my ass, I'd have just packed up my shit and left, changed my name, and moved somewhere else cause my career would have been over.

The site in Herndon where the old Nextel headquarters is located has a whole floor of young musky smelling Hindu chicks doing the codeing. My pheromes were causeing my dick to stay hard all day long while working there. lol

Maybe they can get the money back. SAIC was suted by NYC and had to give back 500 million dollars out of about 700.

False information. CGI Federal had $115,534,070 in federal contacts as of 9/29/2007. Why do people bother to lie when it's so easy to find the truth? CGI's DUNS number is 145969783, just visit usaspending.gov to learn the truth.

In no way defending CGI Fed, but this is no worse than the $300 hammers and $600 toilet seats and a ton of other such abuses and failures. The way some of these firms rape the government is mind-boggling.

fact checking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> False information. CGI Federal had $115,534,070
> in federal contacts as of 9/29/2007. Why do
> people bother to lie when it's so easy to find the
> truth? CGI's DUNS number is 145969783, just visit
> usaspending.gov to learn the truth.


Not what I see using your own reference.

It shows 31 transactions for a total of $16.6 million in 2008.

http://usaspending.gov/searchsummary?form_fields={%22search_term%22:%22CGI%20FEDERAL%20INC%22,%22spending_cat%22:null,%22dept%22:null,%22extent_competed%22:null,%22recipient_duns%22:null,%22psc_code%22:null,%22naics_code%22:null,%22fyear%22:null}

BUT you get different results depending on how you search (by name, by DUNS, by parent DUNS, prime, sub, etc.).

In any case, even using the higher values the growth in value has increased greatly to about 4X what it was.

Do y'all not understand what bandwith is?

If 6 people try to walk through a doorway that is 3 people wide, only 3 people will get in.

It doesn't matter if the other side has a pile of garbage or a dozen hot babes.

German_the_Dean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do y'all not understand what bandwith is?
>
> If 6 people try to walk through a doorway that is
> 3 people wide, only 3 people will get in.
>
> It doesn't matter if the other side has a pile of
> garbage or a dozen hot babes.

Do Ebay and Amazon crash like this?

Half a billion dollars, it should work.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do Ebay and Amazon crash like this?
>
> Half a billion dollars, it should work.


Apples and Oranges.

Ebay and Amazon started from very few hits and built up.

The website has a bandwith to accommodate everyday use. The only reason it crashed was because the first few days were a huge surge with everyone wanted to check it out.

CGI is not the best, but they will work it out eventually.

German_the_Dean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The website has a bandwith to accommodate everyday
> use. The only reason it crashed was because the
> first few days were a huge surge with everyone
> wanted to check it out.

So we paid over a half BILLION dollars to some jagoff web designers who didn't have good sense to forsee that?

John McAfee says its a POS website too, very vulnerable to hackers.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/john-mcafee-predicts-hackers-will-empty-obamacare-enrollees-bank-accounts/article/2537153

Feel free to continue as you are though, zombies.
Attachments:

If you don't like Obamacare, just say you don't like Obamacare!

It lowers your credibility to go off on tangential issues.

Tangential non-issues***

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> German_the_Dean Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The website has a bandwith to accommodate
> everyday
> > use. The only reason it crashed was because the
> > first few days were a huge surge with everyone
> > wanted to check it out.
>
> So we paid over a half BILLION dollars to some
> jagoff web designers who didn't have good sense to
> forsee that?
>
> John McAfee says its a POS website too, very
> vulnerable to hackers.
> http://washingtonexaminer.com/john-mcafee-predicts
> -hackers-will-empty-obamacare-enrollees-bank-accou
> nts/article/2537153
>
> Feel free to continue as you are though, zombies.


WTF are you talking about you godamn jackass. Half a billion, where in hell did you come up with that figure? You're a fucking moron.

"The federal government has spent $634million on the Obamacare website - more than it cost to build Facebook or Twitter, it was revealed today.

Despite the massive bill to taxpayers, the Healthcare.gov still doesn't work properly ten days after it was launched - allowing only a handful of Americans to sign up for plans on the insurance exchange market.


And experts warn that the site is likely to continue to experience significant glitches for months to come as engineers work out the bugs they failed to to spot before the site went live on October 1.


The price tag for the broken healthcare site is more than six and a half times higher than what the government initially meant to pay."


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2452404/Obamacare-website-cost-634MILLION-doesnt-work.html#ixzz2hl6aHUbo
Attachments:

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "The federal government has spent $634million
> on the Obamacare website - more than it cost to
> build Facebook or Twitter, it was revealed today.
>
> Despite the massive bill to taxpayers, the
> Healthcare.gov still doesn't work properly ten
> days after it was launched - allowing only a
> handful of Americans to sign up for plans on the
> insurance exchange market.
>
>
> And experts warn that the site is likely to
> continue to experience significant glitches for
> months to come as engineers work out the bugs they
> failed to to spot before the site went live on
> October 1.
>
>
> The price tag for the broken healthcare site is
> more than six and a half times higher than what
> the government initially meant to pay."
>
>
> Read more:
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2452404/Ob
> amacare-website-cost-634MILLION-doesnt-work.html#i
> xzz2hl6aHUbo


You're a fucking moron. ;)

German_the_Dean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do y'all not understand what bandwith is?
>
> If 6 people try to walk through a doorway that is
> 3 people wide, only 3 people will get in.
>
> It doesn't matter if the other side has a pile of
> garbage or a dozen hot babes.


Uh, no. That's not the primary issue. As they've conceded at this point.

Although they did under-scale the system.

You don't build a site "to accommodate everyday use." Well, maybe some do. And then they fail miserably.

Greybeard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In no way defending CGI Fed, but this is no worse
> than the $300 hammers and $600 toilet seats and a
> ton of other such abuses and failures. The way
> some of these firms rape the government is
> mind-boggling.

The truth is that the $300 hammer and the $600 toilet seat and other similar examples of government waste is a put-up job.

While the hammer showed up on paper as costing $300, most of that money was actually siphoned off into top secret projects that the government doesn't want to leave a paper trail on. These are different than so-called black budget projects, where there's at least a trail that the money was spent on something, even if it's not public what that something was.

The $300 hammer scam is a smoke screen where the government doesn't even want to admit the project or program exists and that we're spending money on it, and it has the side effect of making our nation's enemies think we're stupid and profligate.

"Oh, those Americans are so stupid, they spend $300 for a hammer!" they think.

Yeah, Ivan, that's exactly what they want you to think.

Now, was this the case with the Obamacare website? Probably not. This was a case of poor design and rushed implementation without sufficient time and care taken to properly test the system under load. I'll also bet there's a whole raft of managers, supervisors and nontechnical people who're drawing six figure salaries out of this contract, and a paucity of actual real scientists and experienced engineers.

German_the_Dean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Do Ebay and Amazon crash like this?
> >
> > Half a billion dollars, it should work.
>
>
> Apples and Oranges.
>
> Ebay and Amazon started from very few hits and
> built up.
>
> The website has a bandwith to accommodate everyday
> use. The only reason it crashed was because the
> first few days were a huge surge with everyone
> wanted to check it out.


Still doesn't work. Why lie? It's all over the news that the problems aren't bandwidth, but are systemic and across the board. It was poorly architected, poorly deisgned, poorly built and poorly deployed.

You seem to be an apologist for this administration and this bungled roll out.

I'm not hating on Obama, but this thing has been a complete disaster. If you can't admit that when even Gibbs and Axelrod are on TV saying it, you're a nut.

The US Gov't could have farmed out the website design to a company in India and gotten an actual functioning website at 1/100,000th the price.

Imagine how many people will get lost in the "system".

Why anyone would believe centralizing medicine and putting in the hands of the wasteful/corrupt/incompetent forces of the Establishment baffles me.


Fucking baffles me.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

The most central name in the list of contractors, and the one most closely identified with the outward failure of Healthcare.gov, is CGI Federal, which the Sunlight Foundation describes as "a longtime provider of IT services to the federal government." Most of CGI Federal's previous work centered around technology services for Medicare and Medicaid. According to the New York Times, CGI Federal claimed many problems stemmed from the way the government itself managed the process, including the in-house coordination of the project between subcontractors rather than having a separate contractor do the coordination itself.

All the same, CGI Federal -- which received $88 million for its work since March of this year -- told Congress in September it was indeed ready for the onslaught of users that would come when Healthcare.gov opened to the public. The same was claimed by UnitedHeath subsidiary Quality Software Services, another partner in the project that received $55 million for its work.

One other name in particular on the contractor list probably won't be familiar to readers, but ought to be from now on: Science Applications International Corp., or SAIC. Nominally a defense contractor, SAIC has been involved with many government projects with ghastly end results, such as New York City's fraud- and corruption-riddled $600 million CityTime payroll software boondoggle. When the East Bay Express reported on Oakand, Calif.'s surveillance plan, it was worried about SAIC's involvement in that project as well, not least because the people hiring SAIC for the job seemed unaware of the company's reputation.

SAIC's exact involvement in Healthcare.gov is difficult to determine, in part because a lot of details about who worked on precisely what portions of the project have been hard to come by. The Sunlight Foundation report indicates SAIC had "contracts with the Internal Revenue Service ... for supporting income and family verification procedures required by the health care law."

It also doesn't help that many of the organizations involved are now distancing themselves from the whole project, which seems wise given the scale of this disaster. Compare that attitude with the pride many of them exhibited before Healthcare.gov went online, which was being trumpeted as a marvel of cutting-edge Web engineering. Now it's shaping up to be more an example of the efficacy of political connectedness.

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Imagine how many people will get lost in the
> "system".
>
> Why anyone would believe centralizing medicine and
> putting in the hands of the
> wasteful/corrupt/incompetent forces of the
> Establishment baffles me.
>
>
> Fucking baffles me.

Centralized medicine??

You mean, like medicare?

sound familiar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Imagine how many people will get lost in the
> > "system".
> >
> > Why anyone would believe centralizing medicine
> and
> > putting in the hands of the
> > wasteful/corrupt/incompetent forces of the
> > Establishment baffles me.
> >
> >
> > Fucking baffles me.
>
> Centralized medicine??
>
> You mean, like medicare?


Yeah....

No waste, fraud or abuse in Medicare (or Medicaid).

I'm not saying eliminate them but they could use some re-structuring.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

You either support a govt run medical program-like Medicare/Medicaid and now Affordable Care or you don't.

Can't play both sides.

The discussion about waste is another topic entirely.

like it or you don't Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You either support a govt run medical program-like
> Medicare/Medicaid and now Affordable Care or you
> don't.
>
> Can't play both sides.
>
> The discussion about waste is another topic
> entirely.

Its not that black and white.

I support things like welfare and medicaid but only for a limited time period.

Those programs should be a safety net not a hammock.

Not that simple Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> like it or you don't Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You either support a govt run medical
> program-like
> > Medicare/Medicaid and now Affordable Care or
> you
> > don't.
> >
> > Can't play both sides.
> >
> > The discussion about waste is another topic
> > entirely.
>
> Its not that black and white.
>
> I support things like welfare and medicaid but
> only for a limited time period.
>
> Those programs should be a safety net not a
> hammock.


Nice metaphors!

Fuckin idiots can't tell the difference between a health care policy and implementation of a website

Hey jackasses, if you are upset about the government spending 500 million on a failed website design, you might want to take a look at all the failed defense projects that have cost us orders of magnitude more

F-35 anyone?

Fuckin retards Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fuckin idiots can't tell the difference between a
> health care policy and implementation of a
> website
>
> Hey jackasses, if you are upset about the
> government spending 500 million on a failed
> website design, you might want to take a look at
> all the failed defense projects that have cost us
> orders of magnitude more
>
> F-35 anyone?


Fuckin idiot can't tell the difference between a FFU thread on a health care policy and a thread on the implementation of a website.

When you are losing an argument, change the subject.

Not that simple Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> like it or you don't Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You either support a govt run medical
> program-like
> > Medicare/Medicaid and now Affordable Care or
> you
> > don't.
> >
> > Can't play both sides.
> >
> > The discussion about waste is another topic
> > entirely.
>
> Its not that black and white.
>
> I support things like welfare and medicaid but
> only for a limited time period.
>
> Those programs should be a safety net not a
> hammock.


The programs are INCOME BASED. THEY ARE FOR POOR PEOPLE.

Most poor people stay poor, pal. Minimum wage isn't enough to support a family even if someone works 60 hours a week.

Nice theory though, this hammock thing....

" One person familiar with the project says it’s only about 70 percent of the way there, and has heard estimates of somewhere between two weeks to two months to fix it. As a programmer I know points out, “two weeks to two months” is the programming equivalent of “40 days and 40 nights”: “A long time, but I have no way of knowing how long.” When I used to hear estimates like that, I used to assume it would be coming in on the late end of that range, earliest."


“Deadline after deadline was missed. The biggest contractor, CGI Federal, was awarded its $94 million contract in December 2011. But the government was so slow in issuing specifications that the firm did not start writing software code until this spring, according to people familiar with the process. As late as the last week of September, officials were still changing features of the Web site, HealthCare.gov, and debating whether consumers should be required to register and create password-protected accounts before they could shop for health plans.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-14/obamacare-needs-a-drop-dead-date.html

70% is probably optimistic.

We live in a country where companies need to put instructions on soup cans that say, "1. open can".

ok?

No way the average American-many who don't speaka english, is going to navigate this website.

Ain't gonna work, ever.

people are too stupid Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We live in a country where companies need to put
> instructions on soup cans that say, "1. open
> can".
>
> ok?
>
> No way the average American-many who don't speaka
> english, is going to navigate this website.
>
> Ain't gonna work, ever.


However the people that have health care prior to Obamacare are able to navigate the websites of their insurance companies.

With the web of contractors and subcontractors, they won't pay or get paid unless there's specifications to design and write to. They probably sat on their hands a lot waiting for the next specs.

eLester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> " One person familiar with the project says it’s
> only about 70 percent of the way there, and has
> heard estimates of somewhere between two weeks to
> two months to fix it. As a programmer I know
> points out, “two weeks to two months” is the
> programming equivalent of “40 days and 40
> nights”: “A long time, but I have no way of
> knowing how long.” When I used to hear estimates
> like that, I used to assume it would be coming in
> on the late end of that range, earliest."
>


That remaining 30% also includes the last 5% that's hardest and takes the longest. Easy to get most of the way there. It's that final push to get it all right that's the tough part. And the 1% that fucks up still can cause the whole deal to crash and burn.

fact checking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> False information. CGI Federal had $115,534,070
> in federal contacts as of 9/29/2007. Why do
> people bother to lie when it's so easy to find the
> truth? CGI's DUNS number is 145969783, just visit
> usaspending.gov to learn the truth.

Because if republicans told the truth it would make them look like a bunch of idiots.

That plus you have a bunch of republican wingnuts who just like to stir shit up because they can't accomplish anything. Better to make others look bad than improves ones self. Or so they think.

I'm a true blue dem and I am deeply bothered by this major screwup.

Noone in govt is ever held accountable for taxpayer waste.

These companies were not qualified for this job-period.

Stop wasting money, guys, we owe $17 trillion already.

people are too stupid Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We live in a country where companies need to put
> instructions on soup cans that say, "1. open
> can".
>
> ok?
>
> No way the average American-many who don't speaka
> english, is going to navigate this website.
>
> Ain't gonna work, ever.

Not true at all. Its easy to navigate. And yes, the first few days were harsh. on the 3rd day, I had an account set up, and was staring at 45 plans in the Silver/Gold band to choose from. The choice is damn near overwhelming. Kaiser, BC/BS, and Coventry offer the most choices.

Your partisan whack-jobbery is showing. You clearly know nothing of what you speak. This country would be better off if you either STFU, or killed yourself.

this is nonpartisan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm a true blue dem and I am deeply bothered by
> this major screwup.
>
> Noone in govt is ever held accountable for
> taxpayer waste.
>
> These companies were not qualified for this
> job-period.
>
> Stop wasting money, guys, we owe $17 trillion
> already.


The CGI subsidiary that won this contract is the old AMS, who built a huge business doing civilian govt contracting in the 80s and 90s, and delivering it with thousands of 23 year old coders. They were good at landing deals, not so good at delivering them. So there's that.

There's nothing "canadian" about them, other than their ownership. ( They bought AMS for a billion dollars about 10 years ago).

I work there. It's mostly Indians brought over here on H1-B visas. Cheap labor who don't know what they're doing. I always find shoe prints on the toilets because they can't figure out they aren't squat toilets. Also they aren't used to flushing it seems or using the right amount of toilet paper. Toilets are always full of shit and toilet paper up to the rims. Disgusting people.

CGI still has a bunch of americans.

It is Quality Software Services, that built the Data Hub the screwed up the exchange.

see -> http://www.myvisajobs.com/Visa-Sponsor/Quality-Software-Services/441953_Visa.htm

QSSI has 200 employees but over 62 H1bs ADDED in 2012 and 59 H1Bs added in 2011. It a indian body shop that the US government hired to do american healthcare web site. We have lots of good developers in america. Why do people keep hiring these Indians to do crap work, when will it stop that people hire bottom of the bucket for cheap work.

Our culture needs to start taking care of our own college students first. These Indians are able to use these government programs and underbid.

American culture keeps shooting itself in the foot. When will we learn to take care of our own kids. This isn't rocket science, and even if it is Americans can do this just as well as asians from half way around the world.

Hey SmartMove!!!!!!!

"The US Gov't could have farmed out the website design to a company in India and gotten an actual functioning website at 1/100,000th the price. "

that is what they did and why it failed!!!!

QSSI built the data hub that is unstable and crashing.

see -> http://www.myvisajobs.com/Visa-Sponsor/Quality-Software-Services/441953_Visa.htm

QSSI has 200 employees but over 62 H1bs ADDED in 2012 and 59 H1Bs added in 2011. It a indian body shop that the US government hired to do american healthcare web site. We have lots of good developers in america. Why do people keep hiring these Indians to do crap work, when will it stop that people hire bottom of the bucket for cheap work.

Our culture needs to start taking care of our own college students first. These Indians are able to use these government programs and underbid.

Do these guys pay taxes?

So the Olympic uniforms were made in china and caused an outrage but hiring these guys is ok.

Explain Obama care?