The federal government will pay $18,000,000 for one freaking Web site. "Government out of control" this is wasteful spending?
Click to vote
3%2 Votes
Strongly Disagree
4%3 Votes
Disagree
12%9 Votes
Undecided
32%24 Votes
Agree
49%37 Votes
Strongly Agree
3%2 Votes
Strongly Disagree
4%3 Votes
Disagree
12%9 Votes
Undecided
32%24 Votes
Agree
49%37 Votes
Strongly Agree
Male
Female
2%1 Votes
Strongly Disagree
2%1 Votes
Disagree
17%9 Votes
Undecided
39%21 Votes
Agree
41%22 Votes
Strongly Agree
Results by Country
Results by Voter Type
Community votes are collected from you and other visitors to Ask500People. Independent votes are collected from visitors to hundreds of other websites around the world.
Sign Up or Login
Sorry, this data is only available to users with an account.
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
The fact is, it does not need to be done at all. This money is supposed to be spent on stimulus not on wasteful thing like this,,,but what can you expect from this administration.
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
No, it not 18 thousand or even 1.8 million it's 18 million. It was awarded to a Maryland-based Company after political contributions to Steny Hoyer though he said he didn't do it! The company has received over 260 million $$$ in contracts (it's great to have friends in high places).
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
The Cancer "survival rate" is higher here then Canada or European countries by as much as 16% but can be nearly as much as 30% for some forms and countries. It is the best in the world here! And we want the government to run it?
"As a proportion of GDP, government health care spending in the United States is larger than in most other large western countries"
"In spite of the amount spent on health care in the US, a 2008 report by the Commonwealth Fund ranked the United States last in the quality of health care among the 19 compared countries.[8] Other comparisons conclude that the US system performs better on some measures, such as responsiveness and higher cure rates for some serious illnesses such as cancer." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_reform_in_the_United_States
(I also tried voting you back up as the comment seems to be true enough)
Not to say that you are stretching the truth, but when you post questions accusing the government of doing something this wasteful, the least you could do is post a link providing your documentation...
To be fair this isn't a one time payment of 18 million for a website, which is kind of what the question makes it sound like. It is 18 million for a 5 year contract on the web site and it operation, or about 3.6 million per year. Out of that they have to pay for hardware (servers, racks, switches, routers, etc.), infrastructure (High capacity Internet bandwidth [several thousands/month], power, rent), manpower (admins, DBA, mangers, contractors, etc.), backups (UPS, data backups systems, possibly a second DR site), security, software licencing... I can easily see this "one web site" being far more expensive than people would think it would be.
However that being said, the government is always a very inefficient and wasteful spender. If government was to go and buy one item off the $1 dollar menu at McDonald's, I'm sure it would cost them at least $10 to make that purchase. One reason I don't like the government redistributing my money; they are very inefficient and wasteful.
[1 point]3 years ago by dr1024ReplyEdited 3 years ago by dr1024
That is my point. They are not paying one person, then are paying salaries for many people and a lot of hardware and infrastructure. Again I'm not saying that they are not overspending and that their isn't wast. But at the same time how much do you think it cost to setup a large scale web site and maintain it. It isn't like they are going to go and use a shared server at rackspace for this.
[2 points]3 years ago by dr1024ReplyEdited 3 years ago by dr1024
You have no idea what 18 million is, lots of people, what 2 or 3, even if it took a dozen to setup, running it is nothing. "Hardware and infrastructure", get real, a couple of servers, service lines and you're cooking. Go crazy and you won't come close to spending a million in 5 years.
Some will say anything to justify the waste generated by this administration.
First, I did not bid because it is not my occupation! Is it yours? That makes me as much an expert as you! Second & third is just changing the subject, you've had that opportunity for the last 8 years, time to move on, (you're just repeating yourself) to this "corrupt" administration. ►18 MILLION◄ is more money then you'll ever make or see or probably ever dream about! This is special interest pork for past donations made to democrat Steny Hoyer, I hope you know that! Political corruption, plain and simple!
Last!
Are you crazy? Yes, of course, I think they should account for the money they've wasted already, with the bogus scams they're run on the American people. The special interests, the ► dictatorship ◄ with corporate takeovers and appointing CZAR'S to control private American corporations and this after only 6 months. This administration is full of corrupt politicians, most failing to pay their own income taxes. Imagine the many different kinds of corruption, as he gets experience, he has yet to do to us. We are on the path to socialism with him!
If it is not your occupation then how do you know it is not a bargain?
Second and third are putting the amount of "waste" as you call it in perspective. You are blaming it on the "other" party but failing to recognize it when members of "your" party do the same and worse. They "lost" Billions of dollars, not millions.
As for the argumentum ad hominem, I could well be crazy, for the sake of this argument lets agree that I am.
Appointing people in charge of the jobs that need to be done, so everyone has a clear understanding who to report on what subject, is just sound management practice.
Failing to pay income tax is not corruption, having a dispute with the IRS is not uncommon nor is it illegal. But I certainly would like to see the tax laws simplified, but that is another subject.
First ►"read"◄ the Question asked! It was a question, I just happen to believe it is waste. Asking me to prove it doesn't make your case, it's just a simple cop-out on your part. Try using common sense, If it's also just a redesign and not a complete web site it's even harder to defend, I also gave some fiqures below to your 2nd answer, try reading it.
You're 2nd & 3rd point is simply trying to change the subject and has nothing to do with the question. Let me add though, Prez Bush didn't spend millions on websites like Obama. You say they lost "Billions", where, when, how, prove it? I didn't think you could, just blowing hot air!
Also Bush you say spent billions, well sorry to break the news to you but in less then a year, obama has spent "TRILLIONS" and that is plural.
He has wasted billions on the bailout to AIG, JP Morgan, Citigroup, Well Fargo, GM, Chrysler, etc., he's spent our kids future earnings and maybe their kids. He's created a new word to use in the national budgets, "trillions" where Bush was only "billions". I'm sure you have ►"NO"◄ idea how much a trillion is, it you can't figure out a million!!! Let me tell you so you'll be able to understand:
It takes a thousand - thousands to = a million
It takes a thousand - millions to = a billion
It takes a thousand - billions to = a trillion
► or a "million" - "millions" ◄.
You also have to remember, Bush didn't have control over Congress like obama has with a dem house & senate (super majority, filibuster-proof) majority.
Appointing CZAR's to control private corporations is not capitalism, it's socialism. He did that with the automakers and the banking industry. It's not "jobs that need to be done","clear understanding" or "sound management practice", it socialism or a dictatorship of private corporations.
Since when has not paying you're taxes not been a crime? The unpaid taxes were not in dispute, they were just ignored and unpaid like they were above the law! It's a pattern of the democrats in this administration!
You really know how to stretch the truth!
[0 points]3 years ago by ncattReplyEdited 3 years ago by ncatt
And some can't read what has been said, nor know what they are saying.
1) I've said it was wastfull as is all government spending.
2) But you also have obviously never been responsible for a large business or government web site, or you would know that they are not cheep to run, employ far more people and contractors that you think and can easily cost hundreds of thousands per year for even a small site. (These are not small DIY websites.)
[1 point]3 years ago by dr1024ReplyEdited 3 years ago by dr1024
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
1) Good!
2) No, I've never run GM or Citigroup (bet you haven't either). What I understand though is most government web sites should cost less then a ½ million to operate per year (high $ #'s) And this is only for a ►"redesign"◄, the site is already up. I don't know if this even includes the operating costs such as the servers or service lines.
United States
If you think you could do it for less, I suggest you bid the job.
This comment was deleted.
[-1 points] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyThink of the jobs it creating? For only 18 million we create, how many jobs?
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
probably about 6 or 7, what a bargain!
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
The fact is, it does not need to be done at all. This money is supposed to be spent on stimulus not on wasteful thing like this,,,but what can you expect from this administration.
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
The web site is suppose to tell us how they're wasting the sti... spending the stimulus money!
By serving as an example?
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
No, it not 18 thousand or even 1.8 million it's 18 million. It was awarded to a Maryland-based Company after political contributions to Steny Hoyer though he said he didn't do it! The company has received over 260 million $$$ in contracts (it's great to have friends in high places).
This comment was deleted.
[-2 points] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyWorks here and it half the cost and scores higher then what you currently have.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
The Cancer "survival rate" is higher here then Canada or European countries by as much as 16% but can be nearly as much as 30% for some forms and countries. It is the best in the world here! And we want the government to run it?
Probably represents differences in the timeliness of diagnosis and not any superior medical treatment from private sector compared to public.
Yeah, "maybe" it is!!! ►You◄ can bet your life on it!
True, wikipedia confirmed that.
"As a proportion of GDP, government health care spending in the United States is larger than in most other large western countries"
"In spite of the amount spent on health care in the US, a 2008 report by the Commonwealth Fund ranked the United States last in the quality of health care among the 19 compared countries.[8] Other comparisons conclude that the US system performs better on some measures, such as responsiveness and higher cure rates for some serious illnesses such as cancer." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_reform_in_the_United_States
(I also tried voting you back up as the comment seems to be true enough)
It ALWAYS has been out of control no matter who has been president or in congress.
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 3 years ago by deleted user Replyrecovery.gov
Not to say that you are stretching the truth, but when you post questions accusing the government of doing something this wasteful, the least you could do is post a link providing your documentation...
Google it!
http://www.politics.com/news/13262/obama039s-18-million-dollar-website/
http://www.aipnews.com/talk/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=6132&posts=1
I'm glad you are not telling me I'm stretching the truth! Now you know the government is this wasteful!
To be fair this isn't a one time payment of 18 million for a website, which is kind of what the question makes it sound like. It is 18 million for a 5 year contract on the web site and it operation, or about 3.6 million per year. Out of that they have to pay for hardware (servers, racks, switches, routers, etc.), infrastructure (High capacity Internet bandwidth [several thousands/month], power, rent), manpower (admins, DBA, mangers, contractors, etc.), backups (UPS, data backups systems, possibly a second DR site), security, software licencing... I can easily see this "one web site" being far more expensive than people would think it would be.
However that being said, the government is always a very inefficient and wasteful spender. If government was to go and buy one item off the $1 dollar menu at McDonald's, I'm sure it would cost them at least $10 to make that purchase. One reason I don't like the government redistributing my money; they are very inefficient and wasteful.
Do you have any idea how mush 18 "MILLION" dollars is??? How long will it take you to earn ►"eighteen million"◄, more then 5 years, I'll bet!
That is my point. They are not paying one person, then are paying salaries for many people and a lot of hardware and infrastructure. Again I'm not saying that they are not overspending and that their isn't wast. But at the same time how much do you think it cost to setup a large scale web site and maintain it. It isn't like they are going to go and use a shared server at rackspace for this.
What point???
You have no idea what 18 million is, lots of people, what 2 or 3, even if it took a dozen to setup, running it is nothing. "Hardware and infrastructure", get real, a couple of servers, service lines and you're cooking. Go crazy and you won't come close to spending a million in 5 years.
Some will say anything to justify the waste generated by this administration.
First of all, I am not disputing or confirming if this is a waste, but why did you not bid for the contract if you think you can do it cheaper?
Secondly, have they traced the billions of dollars that are unaccounted for under the previous administration?
Thirdly, how much do you think was wasteful spending under Bush?
Do you believe that this, or any administration should publicly account for the money they spend?
First, I did not bid because it is not my occupation! Is it yours? That makes me as much an expert as you! Second & third is just changing the subject, you've had that opportunity for the last 8 years, time to move on, (you're just repeating yourself) to this "corrupt" administration. ►18 MILLION◄ is more money then you'll ever make or see or probably ever dream about! This is special interest pork for past donations made to democrat Steny Hoyer, I hope you know that! Political corruption, plain and simple!
Last!
Are you crazy? Yes, of course, I think they should account for the money they've wasted already, with the bogus scams they're run on the American people. The special interests, the ► dictatorship ◄ with corporate takeovers and appointing CZAR'S to control private American corporations and this after only 6 months. This administration is full of corrupt politicians, most failing to pay their own income taxes. Imagine the many different kinds of corruption, as he gets experience, he has yet to do to us. We are on the path to socialism with him!
If it is not your occupation then how do you know it is not a bargain?
Second and third are putting the amount of "waste" as you call it in perspective. You are blaming it on the "other" party but failing to recognize it when members of "your" party do the same and worse. They "lost" Billions of dollars, not millions.
As for the argumentum ad hominem, I could well be crazy, for the sake of this argument lets agree that I am.
Appointing people in charge of the jobs that need to be done, so everyone has a clear understanding who to report on what subject, is just sound management practice.
Failing to pay income tax is not corruption, having a dispute with the IRS is not uncommon nor is it illegal. But I certainly would like to see the tax laws simplified, but that is another subject.
First ►"read"◄ the Question asked! It was a question, I just happen to believe it is waste. Asking me to prove it doesn't make your case, it's just a simple cop-out on your part. Try using common sense, If it's also just a redesign and not a complete web site it's even harder to defend, I also gave some fiqures below to your 2nd answer, try reading it.
You're 2nd & 3rd point is simply trying to change the subject and has nothing to do with the question. Let me add though, Prez Bush didn't spend millions on websites like Obama. You say they lost "Billions", where, when, how, prove it? I didn't think you could, just blowing hot air!
Also Bush you say spent billions, well sorry to break the news to you but in less then a year, obama has spent "TRILLIONS" and that is plural.
He has wasted billions on the bailout to AIG, JP Morgan, Citigroup, Well Fargo, GM, Chrysler, etc., he's spent our kids future earnings and maybe their kids. He's created a new word to use in the national budgets, "trillions" where Bush was only "billions". I'm sure you have ►"NO"◄ idea how much a trillion is, it you can't figure out a million!!! Let me tell you so you'll be able to understand:
It takes a thousand - thousands to = a million
It takes a thousand - millions to = a billion
It takes a thousand - billions to = a trillion
► or a "million" - "millions" ◄.
You also have to remember, Bush didn't have control over Congress like obama has with a dem house & senate (super majority, filibuster-proof) majority.
Appointing CZAR's to control private corporations is not capitalism, it's socialism. He did that with the automakers and the banking industry. It's not "jobs that need to be done","clear understanding" or "sound management practice", it socialism or a dictatorship of private corporations.
Since when has not paying you're taxes not been a crime? The unpaid taxes were not in dispute, they were just ignored and unpaid like they were above the law! It's a pattern of the democrats in this administration!
You really know how to stretch the truth!
And some can't read what has been said, nor know what they are saying.
1) I've said it was wastfull as is all government spending.
2) But you also have obviously never been responsible for a large business or government web site, or you would know that they are not cheep to run, employ far more people and contractors that you think and can easily cost hundreds of thousands per year for even a small site. (These are not small DIY websites.)
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
1) Good!
2) No, I've never run GM or Citigroup (bet you haven't either). What I understand though is most government web sites should cost less then a ½ million to operate per year (high $ #'s) And this is only for a ►"redesign"◄, the site is already up. I don't know if this even includes the operating costs such as the servers or service lines.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMuQZTgciNE
That's alright, defend him and when your pockets are empty.....!