Forbes: Why Obamacare's Website Keeps Crashing

[SaurusX]

It makes sense when you realize that you'll basically be her before you know it.

Well, unless you believe in the right wing fairy tale that you'll be rich by then.

The fact that older people hold the vast majority of the wealth in this country isn't a fairy tale. And no, it still does not make sense to pay for someone else's treatment no matter how you want to twist your logic into a pretzel. But I understand, the concept of personal responsibility in this country is long dead.

 

[Doppel]

I loaded healthcare.gov and tried to create an account just now in IE8. At the top of the page, not only is there a horizontal bar that goes right through the text, but also it says on screen a debug message up to "- changed from IE8 to IE9".

This is demonstrative of a grossly insufficient QA process and has nothing to do with users. That the developer's comment is STILL in production to this day because he either didn't notice he failed to include this in comment tags OR he was in the middle of testing and just got side-tracked and now it's in production are both terrible excuses for this system.

 

[Doppel]

Okay so more of the quotes from the Aetna CEO. He says testing was done on the fly. The notion that the system was not meaningfully tested, something that is absurd, seems to be true. Anybody who has ever seen an IT project knows that the test cycle can be as much as half of the project length. It is habitually cut short on most projects because to the business it feels like filler, but the reality is what it is.

This convincingly contradicts the claim that it is just the sheer number of users at fault here. Anybody involved in the system claiming such is either lying or has been misled by somebody else and remains in a state of ignorance. People should be losing their jobs over this. It makes sense though and explains why the site has functioned so horrifically.

 

[Tom]

The fact that older people hold the vast majority of the wealth in this country isn't a fairy tale. And no, it still does not make sense to pay for someone else's treatment no matter how you want to twist your logic into a pretzel. But I understand, the concept of personal responsibility in this country is long dead.

Listen buddy, Grandma hasn't been 80 forever.

She built the country your ass is living off of.

And Obamacare is ALL about personal responsibility. Healthy people who don't have sufficient insurance when they get sick or injured are the biggest example of a lack of personal responsibility we have.

 

[Fern]

-snip-
And Obamacare is ALL about personal responsibility.

How is Obamacare ALL about "personal responsibility" when the young must subsidize the old and, as I have been told, I must subsidize others' maternity and pediatric care. (My wife and I are in our mid 50's, so if we're paying for maternity and pediatric care, which we must, it sure ain't ours.)

Fern

 

[First]

How is Obamacare ALL about "personal responsibility" when the young must subsidize the old and, as I have been told, I must subsidize others' maternity and pediatric care. (My wife and I are in our mid 50's, so if we're paying for maternity and pediatric care, which we must, it sure ain't ours.)

Fern

Federal social insurance has been around nearly 100 years, and works quite well in spreading risk and ensuring that people take responsibility for their lives by managing their risk instead of inefficiently spreading higher costs to other people through ER care.

Frankly, any other way of looking at it misses the point of insurance entirely.

 

[Jhhnn]

How is Obamacare ALL about "personal responsibility" when the young must subsidize the old and, as I have been told, I must subsidize others' maternity and pediatric care. (My wife and I are in our mid 50's, so if we're paying for maternity and pediatric care, which we must, it sure ain't ours.)

Fern

Heh. If you've had group employer sponsored healthcare most of your life, as many of us have, then older members contributed to maternity & child care for your family when you were younger. Even if you're childless, it was there for you if you needed it.

The ACA is much the same in that respect, just with a much bigger pool of people, one that won't disappear when you're unemployed or when you switch employers.

Or are Righties going to start raving about group insurance in general, the backbone of our system since the 50's & 60's?

 

[Jhhnn]

Federal social insurance has been around nearly 100 years, and works quite well in spreading risk and ensuring that people take responsibility for their lives by managing their risk instead of inefficiently spreading higher costs to other people through ER care.

Frankly, any other way of looking at it misses the point of insurance entirely.

Well, yeh, of course, but Righties in a snit can't see past the ends of their noses, so here we are.

 

[werepossum]

I'm finding it hard to believe that the effort of Obama et al is being spent on crashing a website so people can't get information on ACA costs.

I see ego and poor judgement, but conspiracy? No.

There's a difference between doing the wrong things for the right reasons and something that the Horsemen from the old X-Files would conjure up.

I thought the same thing. LOL I really can't see how not showing the true cost plus the subsidy should make the system not work, although any six month $600 million project is likely to be a fuster cluck even without throwing government into the mix.

No offense but you have an unbending opinion. One that cannot be changed. If you didn't you wouldn't find the ONE riot we have had here where a hundred kids burned a hundred cars. I live here. I also lived in LA. The Rodney King Riots were a riot. This was a bunch of trouble maker kids burning a few cars and throwing some rocks for a few days until the neighbors came out and yelled at them to stop. I'm not trying to necessarily down play the riot but the scope of it is kinda important.

Regardless your argument is racist. You said that the reason we are so happy here is because we're all the same. I'm telling you that we aren't. It's not as diverse as San Francisco necessarily but it's made huge changes in the last couple of generations. My mother didn't see her first black person until she was in her early 20's.

Racial tension in Sweden are a fact of life just like they are in the USA. People simply fear what is different. It takes time to integrate into a new society. The problem we have here with immigration is that unemployment is something like 8.7% and most of those are immigrants. Once they get integrated and get a job it gets much better but the town that had the riots is filled with people who are fresh off the boat. Population 11,000 people.

My family in the states had a hard time until they learned English and got established. That's the reality of immigration. They are outside of the system in the beginning. I can't just move to Iran and be part of their world. It doesn't work like that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Stockholm_riots

Might be worth a look for you since your link didn't actually mention the cause of the riots.

You're actually making his argument for him. People who are more alike typically get along better. Once the newcomers are established, learn the language, get integrated into the society, they are not so "other" and there is less friction. Ergo the fewer people who are not yet unestablished and ignorant (or uncaring) of the language and customs, the less friction and the happier people tend to be since all of "them" are somewhere else and we're all "us" over here.

It also bears repeating that while a homogeneous nation may be happier, it is not necessarily stronger. One of the USA's great strengths has always been our mongrel nature. In learning to cope with different people and groups, one learns how to cope with new situations in general - highly valuable when competing in business. Or when going to war, where speed in coping with new situations may mean keeping your freedom or your life.

 

[michal1980]

I thought the same thing. LOL I really can't see how not showing the true cost plus the subsidy should make the system not work, although any six month $600 million project is likely to be a fuster cluck even without throwing government into the mix.


You're actually making his argument for him. People who are more alike typically get along better. Once the newcomers are established, learn the language, get integrated into the society, they are not so "other" and there is less friction. Ergo the fewer people who are not yet unestablished and ignorant (or uncaring) of the language and customs, the less friction and the happier people tend to be since all of "them" are somewhere else and we're all "us" over here.

It also bears repeating that while a homogeneous nation may be happier, it is not necessarily stronger. One of the USA's great strengths has always been our mongrel nature. In learning to cope with different people and groups, one learns how to cope with new situations in general - highly valuable when competing in business. Or when going to war, where speed in coping with new situations may mean keeping your freedom or your life.

The one article actually pointed that out.

On a business level diversity is very good. Lots of different ideas coming together help companies grow and profit.