Report: Final Cost of Obamacare Website Tops $1 Billion

$1 Billion
1,000,000,000 /50,000 = 20,000

1 Billion Dollars could have put 20,000 sovereign IT workers to work making $50,000 over the course of a year!! Put 30,000 making $33,333 over a year.

Taxing these workers flat tax of 10% will bring back in $100,000,000.

900 Million gets dumped into the local economy instead the pocket of a few behind the curtains!!

This, This is greed!!

Me
Greed is a seed that grows in the heart then tears it apart!!

10 million should cover maintenance and hardware for a long time in the private sector.

Where people plan every dollar to get ahead!!

I'm sorry, corporate sector, cuz private sector is almost extinct!!

' according to a devastating new report by a widely respected government analyst. "and the analyst is?
of course more BS from the " tea-party " I sure since no one gave their name to the report..
get over it, not even shutting down the Government stop the Health bill.

reply to post by matted


Repeating your talking points like a good little bot? Did you even bother to read the attached article, or just jump in to disparage your newly appointed enemy?

Here let me help you out. From the linked article:

The report released Thursday by Bloomberg Government analyst Peter Gosselin says that federal spending ramped up in the months leading up to Oct. 1, with $352 million of the $1 billion in federal contracts to the top 10 Obamacare contractors awarded during this time.

"In a typical IT project, spending ramps up to a peak, then trails off during the final phase," Gosselin wrote.

This is a huge increase from the price tag usually associated the Affordable Care Act rollout: $394 million. That came from a Government Accountability Office report.

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com www.newsmax.com...
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

reply to post by MsAphrodite

do you realise that is a drop in the bucket on what has been spent on Defence contracts and other so called needed contracts? it was a spending free for all before the Fed shut down.
and all approved by the "Law makers."

also no real facts just analysing. oh wait that would make them "predictions" not facts..

the report might as well be a 10 day weather forecast, could change a lot between now and when the real numbers come out.

reply to post by matted


Indeed, "predictions" from the government's own accountability office. Pssshhh...

What's really insane is that one of the contractors who helped design and program healthcare.gov (QSSI) is now IN CHARGE OF the overall effort to fix it! You think QSSI even knows what they did to help screw up the site? Or, if they do know, will they be willing to point out their own mistakes and fix them? Putting the fox in charge of the henhouse is a fast track route to destroy ObamaCare in its present form and bring Universal Healthcare (Government Owned-Operated) to the USA in record time.

Ref: www.washingtonpost.com... 3-11e3-b6a9-da62c264f40e_story.html

If you think a lot of money went to contractors to merely build the site, you can imagine what they're charging to fix the President's signature program that bares his name.
cwm

Michelle Obama’s Princeton classmate is executive at company that built Obamacare website

First Lady Michelle Obama’s Princeton classmate is a top executive at the company that earned the contract to build the failed Obamacare website.

Toni Townes-Whitley, Princeton class of ’85, is senior vice president at CGI Federal, which earned the no-bid contract to build the $678 million Obamacare enrollment website at Healthcare.gov. CGI Federal is the U.S. arm of a Canadian company.

Townes-Whitley and her Princeton classmate Michelle Obama are both members of the Association of Black Princeton Alumni.

Link
dailycaller.com...

This just highlights the number 1 problem with America, there's to much money floating around to get anything done.

And now THIS:

ObamaCare 'co-ops' could leave taxpayers on hook for $1B

video.foxnews.com...

Meanwhile, I could have made it professionally with the ability to scale while being pretty well tested for under $30k in just 3-4 months (would be done in less than a month technically but the importance of the site would require a lot more testing).

I suppose there's a difference between a professional building a site and a group of amateurs using dreaweaver to poorly code what is the most laughable website in the world. The amount of amateur mistakes that is easily viewable in the source code is insane, if I remember correctly, they even had their server signature ON. This is a website that holds records of people, like -- all medical records, all social security numbers, drivers licenses, tax info, credit cards and so on.

How can ANYONE trusts a website that is so poorly constructed? If it's going to cost $1bn to fix, then cancel the website. Countries did perfectly fine without a website when they had social healthcare long before the internet. While I'm not saying the US will do fine with their healthcare (far from it) a website is NOT necessary.

Fox News Only Overestimated HealthCare.gov Cost By $700 Million

as reported in a Washington Post fact-check, yesterday's congressional hearings regarding the ACA website revealed that government contracts to create the website amounted to a total value of less than $300 million. According to The Washington Post:
In the testimony, a reference was made to the fact that the TCV (total contract value) was $292 million. That is the least important number, as in effect it is like a credit card limit. What is more important is what has been already spent or obligated.
To sum up: The floor for spending on the Web site to date appears to be at least $170 million, with an upward potential of nearly $300 million.

Isn`t it nice how the right loves to lie and how their readers never actually research but just totally believe without actually checking. No wonder scientist found that right wingers are the less intelligent out of both groups.
Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice
Controversial Canadian Study Says Conservative People Less Intelligent Than Liberals

The website didn't cost $1 billion to develop. The bulk of that money went to every executive, share holder, investment firm, etc. even loosely connected to the development, graphics, and servers of the website itself. The bonafide programmers who were sub-sub-contracted to do bits and pieces of the actual coding were probably paid piecemeal as it was all thrown together like a patchwork quilt.

I have absolutely no proof for this but feel pretty confident in my assumption.

reply to post by ArchAngel_X


I heard that they outsourced to India, but if that's the case then don't expect anything good. Indians tend not to be good problem solvers. The average IQ is somewhere around 70 and those that can problem solve end up in the US or something. Anyone that has ever had experienced outsourcing will know the horrors of relying on them to do good work. They do not, but they are good at data entry.

reply to post by Em2013


I can't find it now but HP said it could a done the same site with the correct bandwidth for under a mil. The Obama's give / waste money that will do a 180 right in the Obama bank account.

SkipperJohn
reply to post by Em2013

 

I can't find it now but HP said it could a done the same site with the correct bandwidth for under a mil. The Obama's give / waste money that will do a 180 right in the Obama bank account.

Not surprising. The cost to develop it is less than $40k, the rest would be the server equipment/pipeline and cost of maintaining them.

reply to post by IAMTAT


I bet I could make a better site for only $150 and that's including the hosting fees.

ObjectZero
reply to post by IAMTAT

 

I bet I could make a better site for only $150 and that's including the hosting fees.

And I bet you can create more shovel ready jobs providing greater economic stimulus while doing it. Seriously...no sarcasm.

this is BS
no website in the world costs this much to start up
last week it was said it was 634 million, later it was proven grossly wrong

CoolStoryMan
this is BS
no website in the world costs this much to start up
last week it was said it was 634 million, later it was proven grossly wrong

The total amount as stated by The Blaze and Glenn Beck is for staff and maintenance for the next 7-years or so (which is obviously going to go up). The misinterpretation is what it costs to create it. Sunlight Foundation was given $70million USD (now equivalent to the mexican peso hahahaha) and CGI was given $93million to fix the site I think. So I'm not sure what's the difference between CGI and Sunlight but the total from my understanding is $163million to develop the website (so far). The total cost of maintaining the website over the years is estimated to top $1bn which I believe includes initial development costs.

I think it's funny how both The Blaze and Glenn Beck both went through and debunked this myth, while CNN and MSNBC would go out of their way saying it is costing over a billion to make. This paradigm shift is crazy but it just shows you one thing... Investigative journalism is what matters most.

jhn7537
reply to post by IAMTAT

 

Being in IT sales, this makes zero sense. There is no reason why a website should cost anywhere near that amount of money. 1 of 2 things is happening. 1. The US Govt. doesn't know how to run a competitive bid and are being ripped off by whichever vendor they're using or 2. Someone is pocketing some money somewhere...

Maybe this is the answer:
As it happens, the Daily Caller reports that Michelle Obama's college roomie Toni Townes-Whitley, Princeton class of '85, is a senior vice president at CGI Federal, which earned the no-bid contract to build the $678 million ObamaCare...