500 Million Lines of Code

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Mon Mar 03, 2014 10:23 pm

Pinky wrote:
Grandpa's Spells wrote:
...as well as any plan the GOP has put forward.
That's fair. Conservative economists have put forward very good plans (most of which would simply tweak the ACA), but the GOP has been very slow to listen. I don't know if that's because they know that any good reform will piss people off, or if it's because they're too busy combing the Pentateuch for policy advice.

Or maybe because any plan would have to be administered by the executive branch-- the same one which already screwed up the plan they actually wanted.

Grandpa's Spells · Post by **Grandpa's Spells** » Mon Mar 03, 2014 10:37 pm

Turdacious wrote:
Pinky wrote:
Grandpa's Spells wrote:
...as well as any plan the GOP has put forward.
That's fair. Conservative economists have put forward very good plans (most of which would simply tweak the ACA), but the GOP has been very slow to listen. I don't know if that's because they know that any good reform will piss people off, or if it's because they're too busy combing the Pentateuch for policy advice.
Or maybe because any plan would have to be administered by the executive branch-- the same one which already screwed up the plan they actually wanted.

I don't get what the thought process is here. Is it that because the rollout was bungled, that it is irreparable, or that America is uniquely incompetent at having a government-involved healthcare?

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Mon Mar 03, 2014 10:44 pm

Grandpa's Spells wrote:
Turdacious wrote:
Pinky wrote:
Grandpa's Spells wrote:
...as well as any plan the GOP has put forward.
That's fair. Conservative economists have put forward very good plans (most of which would simply tweak the ACA), but the GOP has been very slow to listen. I don't know if that's because they know that any good reform will piss people off, or if it's because they're too busy combing the Pentateuch for policy advice.
Or maybe because any plan would have to be administered by the executive branch-- the same one which already screwed up the plan they actually wanted.
I don't get what the thought process is here. Is it that because the rollout was bungled, that it is irreparable, or that America is uniquely incompetent at having a government-involved healthcare?

We've had government involved health care since the mid 60's. Any successful plan requires an administration capable of executing it. This one hasn't been up to the task of it's own plan, hard to say it would be successful with someone elses.

Pinky · Post by **Pinky** » Tue Mar 04, 2014 12:05 am

I think it's more likely that the GOP isn't talking about alternative plans because the best alternative plans would not scrap Obamacare. They would produce a better version of Obamacare, and that would require acknowledging that some parts of the bill are not terrible.

I don't see that happening unless the GOP takes the White House again. Even then I'm not sure they would reform the ACA in the right direction.

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Tue Mar 04, 2014 12:47 am

Pinky wrote:I think it's more likely that the GOP isn't talking about alternative plans because the best alternative plans would not scrap Obamacare. They would produce a better version of Obamacare, and that would require acknowledging that some parts of the bill are not terrible.

I don't see that happening unless the GOP takes the White House again. Even then I'm not sure they would reform the ACA in the right direction.

How about getting rid of something that didn't work last time? They've proposed that.

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Tue Mar 04, 2014 4:25 am

Grandpa's Spells wrote:[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjXyqcx-mYY[/youtube]

Garm · Post by **Garm** » Tue Mar 04, 2014 4:16 pm

baffled wrote:500 million lines of code is ridiculous.

The original Windows NT was a billion, then MS stopped reporting it's size as it grew more ridiculous. It was compared and found wanting in the tech press to MVS, which was the largest well-known program at the time (in terms of lines of code). MVS is now OS/390, well over 5 billion in the most corpulent 'enterprise' versions. MVS doesn't do anything, so you have to add many more billions to have any useful applications on your big iron.

It's always been cheaper to write inefficient (i.e., bloated) software, and it always will be. Every time some vendor says they have rewritten their product in whatever the latest hot development language might be, sniff through the bullshit and recall the billions of lines of preexisting COBOL, C, and assembly language code that they bolted the small new part atop. 95% of the world's professional programmers suck at their jobs, the equally dumb managers know this and will let anything that comes close to working as planned go into production. Everyone has a prepared excuse, and go on to the next 'successful' development project safe from the stink of their prior fiascoes.

Web applications, specifically, at 500M lines are also not large, depending on how you count them. Fedex.com, for example, had a few hundred thousand lines of Java, about 10X that in *ML, and was integrated to numerous other systems that had many millions of lines of code each. Had they started with a clean slate, all those legacy systems would have had to have been written at the time. That project was 1999-2000, and nothings shrunk since then except perhaps the IQs of the world's technology users.

It's fun to repeat the errors of others, especially if they are loud and frothing when they make them, and they involve numbers that appear daunting, but it's better in the long run to criticize actual problems as opposed to imagined ones, IMO.

Pinky · Post by **Pinky** » Tue Mar 04, 2014 6:40 pm

Turdacious wrote:
Pinky wrote:I think it's more likely that the GOP isn't talking about alternative plans because the best alternative plans would not scrap Obamacare. They would produce a better version of Obamacare, and that would require acknowledging that some parts of the bill are not terrible.

I don't see that happening unless the GOP takes the White House again. Even then I'm not sure they would reform the ACA in the right direction.
How about getting rid of something that didn't work last time? They've proposed that.

Even Obama's advisers want that to happen.

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Fri Mar 07, 2014 2:08 am

Pinky wrote:
Turdacious wrote:
Pinky wrote:I think it's more likely that the GOP isn't talking about alternative plans because the best alternative plans would not scrap Obamacare. They would produce a better version of Obamacare, and that would require acknowledging that some parts of the bill are not terrible.

I don't see that happening unless the GOP takes the White House again. Even then I'm not sure they would reform the ACA in the right direction.
How about getting rid of something that didn't work last time? They've proposed that.
Even Obama's advisers want that to happen.

Apparently not the one that matters:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... topic.html

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Fri Mar 07, 2014 2:12 am

The new health insurance marketplaces appear to be making little headway in signing up Americans who lack insurance, the Affordable Care Act’s central goal, according to a pair of new surveys.

Only one in 10 uninsured people who qualify for private plans through the newmarketplaces enrolled as of last month, one of the surveys shows. The other found that about half of uninsured adults have looked for information on the online exchanges or planned to look.

The snapshots from the surveys released Thursday provide preliminary answers to what has been one of the biggest mysteries since HealthCare.gov and separate state marketplaces opened last fall: Are they attracting their prime audience?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... story.html

EXPLAIN THIS, IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!!!!!!!

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Fri Mar 07, 2014 2:14 am

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cE2EB4nCEvg[/youtube]

NEVER MIND, THIS EXPLAINS IT!

TerryB · Post by **TerryB** » Fri Mar 07, 2014 2:32 am

If the man who signed the Bill is afraid of the pain it's causing, it's unlikely any else is going to sacrifice themselves for it.

I see this folding after he leaves office.

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Sun Mar 09, 2014 12:53 am

A national union that represents 300,000 low-wage hospitality workers charges in a new report that Obamacare will slam wages, cut hours, limit access to health insurance and worsen the very “income equality” President Obama says he is campaigning to fix.

“Only in Washington could asking the bottom of the middle class to finance health care for the poorest families be seen as reducing inequality,” said the report from Unite Here. “Without smart fixes, the ACA threatens the middle class with higher premiums, loss of hours, and a shift to part-time work and less comprehensive coverage,” said the report, titled, “The Irony of Obamacare: Making Inequality Worse.”

http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2545310

The Ginger Beard Man · Sun Mar 09, 2014 5:20 am

Turdacious wrote:
A national union that represents 300,000 low-wage hospitality workers charges in a new report that Obamacare will slam wages, cut hours, limit access to health insurance and worsen the very “income equality” President Obama says he is campaigning to fix.

“Only in Washington could asking the bottom of the middle class to finance health care for the poorest families be seen as reducing inequality,” said the report from Unite Here. “Without smart fixes, the ACA threatens the middle class with higher premiums, loss of hours, and a shift to part-time work and less comprehensive coverage,” said the report, titled, “The Irony of Obamacare: Making Inequality Worse.”
http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2545310

Hehe. That's my union.

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Sun Mar 09, 2014 9:18 pm

The administration now claims that it signed up 4 million people as of late February. Of course, that number is inflated. It has been widely reported; including here at the New York Times, that about 20% of the people who enrolled in January never paid their premium and were cancelled. Carriers are telling me that another 2% to 5% of those January enrollments never paid their second month's premium.

So, that 4 million Obamacare enrollment number is likely more like 3 million.

The Kaiser Family Foundation has said that 17.2 million people are eligible both for the new health insurance exchanges and eligible for a subsidy. Because the direct enrollment function hasn't been working, the only place a person can get a subsidized policy is on the exchanges.

In reporting their enrollments in February, the administration said that 82% of the exchange enrollments were getting a subsidy.

That means only about 2.5 million subsidy eligible people (82% of 3 million) have so far signed up and paid for their coverage out of a total of 17.2 million eligible––or about 15% of the total the Kaiser Family Foundation estimates are eligible.

And many of these already had coverage––they aren't coming from the ranks of the uninsured that are the people this program was really designed to get to.

Even if the administration gets 20%, or 25%, or 30% of the eligible group signed-up by March 31, that is nowhere near enough to create a sustainable pool. The long-time underwriting rule calls for at least 70% of an eligible group to participate in order to get enough healthy people to pay for the sick who will always show up first for coverage.

http://healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.c ... olicy.html

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 11:55 pm

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 11:57 pm

We're back to 2013! Success!

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 1:04 am

As of February 24, 2014, the average premium for an individual health plan selected through eHealth without a subsidy was $274 per month, a 39% increase from the average individual premium for pre-Obamacare coverage1. The most recent average premium for plans without a subsidy chosen by families was $663 per month, a 56% increase over the average family premium in February, 2013, which was $426 per month.

news.ehealthinsurance.com/news/whats-the-true-cost-of-health-insurance-under-obamacare-ehealth-launches-first-national-health-insurance-price-index

At least the labor market is weak, so their ability to demand higher wages is down.

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Sat Mar 15, 2014 12:27 pm

"If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Period."-- explained in English.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvwS62yggd4[/youtube]

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 5:17 pm

As hoop heads across the country prepare for the Big Dance, President Barack Obama's administration is banking on a new March Madness-focused campaign to help boost Obamacare enrollment.

To coincide with the start of NCAA basketball tournament, a White House official says the administration is launching an all-encompassing push around the annual basketball bonanza that will feature athletes, coaches, and others, in hopes of spurring more Americans to sign up for health care before the March 31 deadline.

According to the official, the effort starts in earnest Monday morning when Univision Radio's Locura Deportiva airs an interview with President Obama.

The White House is also set to release a "16 Sweetest Reasons to Get Covered Bracket," detailing the administration’s top reasons to get insured. The administration believes it can parlay the popularity of the President's bracket - a recent tradition that registered the most views of any blog on WhiteHouse.gov during 2013 - into tangible enrollments by updating the results of the ACA bracket based on the "winning" votes from online users.

From there, the White House will pitch basketball fans on all fronts - television, radio, digital, online, and social media - throughout the coming week.

Definitely an improvement from the Richard Simmons campaign.

The White House official told CNN many key players in the administration, including chief of staff Denis McDonough, senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer, senior adviser Phil Schiliro, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius will play prominent roles in the campaign... Duncan and Schiliro will also call in to sports stations across the country to sell the merits of the law... The administration official also says HHS plans on tasking Sebelius, a Kansas Jayhawks fan, with tweeting about the tournament's action.

And we're back to Richard Simmons class.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... ss-monday/

DrDonkeyLove · Post by **DrDonkeyLove** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:45 pm

The Ginger Beard Man wrote:
Turdacious wrote:
A national union that represents 300,000 low-wage hospitality workers charges in a new report that Obamacare will slam wages, cut hours, limit access to health insurance and worsen the very “income equality” President Obama says he is campaigning to fix.

“Only in Washington could asking the bottom of the middle class to finance health care for the poorest families be seen as reducing inequality,” said the report from Unite Here. “Without smart fixes, the ACA threatens the middle class with higher premiums, loss of hours, and a shift to part-time work and less comprehensive coverage,” said the report, titled, “The Irony of Obamacare: Making Inequality Worse.”
http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2545310
Hehe. That's my union.

What's the word amongst the members you work with? Do they see this as a big pay cut?
How about the cutting of the amount of hours worked?

Real Clear Politics - Jack Kelly

Obamacare will reduce the earnings of its 300,000 members by up to $5 an hour by requiring them to buy health insurance, according to a report by Unite Here, a union which represents chiefly lower-wage workers in service industries. The union said it “threatens the middle class with higher premiums, loss of hours and a shift to part-time work and less comprehensive coverage.”

The report quoted Earl Baskerville, 50, a food service worker at the University of Hartford in Connecticut: “Obamacare would cost me $4,855.20 a year more, or a $2.33 an hour pay cut.” And Angela Portillo, a maid at the Mandalay Bay Resort in Las Vegas: “The Obamacare website says (my husband and I) would have to pay $8,057.04 a year more to keep the great insurance we have now. That’s a $3.87 per hour pay cut.”

The Ginger Beard Man · Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:38 am

DrDonkeyLove wrote:
The Ginger Beard Man wrote:
Turdacious wrote:
A national union that represents 300,000 low-wage hospitality workers charges in a new report that Obamacare will slam wages, cut hours, limit access to health insurance and worsen the very “income equality” President Obama says he is campaigning to fix.

“Only in Washington could asking the bottom of the middle class to finance health care for the poorest families be seen as reducing inequality,” said the report from Unite Here. “Without smart fixes, the ACA threatens the middle class with higher premiums, loss of hours, and a shift to part-time work and less comprehensive coverage,” said the report, titled, “The Irony of Obamacare: Making Inequality Worse.”
http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2545310
Hehe. That's my union.
What's the word amongst the members you work with? Do they see this as a big pay cut?
How about the cutting of the amount of hours worked?

Real Clear Politics - Jack Kelly
Obamacare will reduce the earnings of its 300,000 members by up to $5 an hour by requiring them to buy health insurance, according to a report by Unite Here, a union which represents chiefly lower-wage workers in service industries. The union said it “threatens the middle class with higher premiums, loss of hours and a shift to part-time work and less comprehensive coverage.”

The report quoted Earl Baskerville, 50, a food service worker at the University of Hartford in Connecticut: “Obamacare would cost me $4,855.20 a year more, or a $2.33 an hour pay cut.” And Angela Portillo, a maid at the Mandalay Bay Resort in Las Vegas: “The Obamacare website says (my husband and I) would have to pay $8,057.04 a year more to keep the great insurance we have now. That’s a $3.87 per hour pay cut.”

I'm with Unite Here Now Local 100 in NYC. I work at Smith&Wollensky, which is part of Fourth Wall Restaurants, and not connected to the S&W's in other cities. We recently went 15 months without a contract, and it was pretty much all about the cost of insurance. Our pension plan figured in, but to a lesser degree.
First the hours:
Our insurance eligibility is based on days worked per month, not hours. We need 15 days per month, and it doesn't matter if they are lunches or dinners. Work both in the same day and you only get one day.
Management wanted very much to shift to an hours worked system. We made it very clear that it was a strike issue. They will not allow us to work more than forty hours a week (or they won't pay us to, is more accurate.) But the nature of the job makes it almost impossible to get in between 30 and 40 consistently. (Your shift ends when your customers leave.) The place grossed about $32 million last year, and only one other store in the company made money, so they conceded.
The pay cut:
Yes and no. We only make $5/ hour, the rest is tips. We had a tiered system, with senior guys getting a more expensive plan (premium) with lower deductibles and more generous limits. Managed insisted on putting everybody in the lesser tiered plan with lower premiums but higher deductibles. The older guys ended up paying less each week in premium, and the rest of us were unwilling to strike to keep them in their old plan.
Obamacare actually helped here. By limiting the out of pocket cost the way it does, the old guys realized they didn't have much to lose.
The cost of the lower tiered plan nearly tripled in the first year of the contract, from about $15 a week to about $43. And we started in the second year, so we are currently at $53 a week. That's a huge increase, but we all realized that we were paying so little before that we had to take a hit.
Management offset the hit we took with two big concessions to help out our tipped income. (1) The automatic gratuity on parties of six or more went from 18% to 20%. (2)we now have a suggested gratuity that prints on the check. We used to get killed by foreign tourists under tipping.
So I make more money than last year, even though I pay more for insurance. I'm better off.

The thing about Unite Here is they represent a lot of cafeteria workers, concession stand people (like at Barclays Center in Brooklyn) and airport food service people. They are in a very different boat than I am, and probably are being hurt a lot more.

The Ginger Beard Man · Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:43 am

A little bit of irony at home:
At the beginning of the year I moved in with my girlfriend. She is a journalist, a registered Democrat, and basically a supporter of Obamacare.
She works for a national magazine publishing company, and the magazine she writes for covers healthcare.
Her new insurance sucks. The deductible is so high she might as well not have insurance. So in December, when we have an open enrollment at work, I'll probably add her to my plan.
Everyone at my job has a family plan, even guys like me, so my cost won't change, although it will fuck up my taxes.

baffled · Post by **baffled** » Wed Mar 19, 2014 4:18 am

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/obama ... ctor-bills

he hospital bills are hitting Larry Basich’s mailbox.

That would be OK if Basich had health insurance. But he doesn’t.

Thing is, he should be covered. Basich, 62, bought a plan through the state’s Nevada Health Link insurance exchange in the fall. He’s been paying monthly premiums since November.

Yet the Las Vegan is stranded in a no-man’s-land where no carrier claims him, and his tab is mounting: Basich owes $407,000 for care received in January and February, when his policy was supposed to be in effect. Instead, he’s covered only for March and beyond.

Basich has begged for weeks for help from the exchange and its contractor, Xerox. But Basich’s insurance broker said Xerox seems more interested in lawyering up and covering its hide than in working out Basich’s problems. Nor is Basich the only client facing plan-selection errors through the exchange, she added.

Xerox, meanwhile, said it’s working every day to fix Basich’s problem, and its legal counsel is routine.

In the rollout of the Affordable Care Act and its insurance exchanges, you can find a success story for every failure. But Basich’s case is extreme.

WHO’S RESPONSIBLE?

Basich said he began trying to enroll on Oct. 1, the day the exchange website went live. Like many consumers, he fought technical flaws during multiple sign-up attempts. In mid-November he finally got through and chose his plan: UnitedHealthcare’s MyHPNSilver1.

“It was like reaching the third level of Doom,” Basich said of the torturous sign-up process.

Basich paid his first premium on Nov. 21, and within days the exchange withdrew the $160.77 payment from his money-market savings account. Because Basich paid a month before the Dec. 23 deadline, his coverage was to begin Jan. 1.

Weeks ticked by, but Basich received nothing to confirm he had insurance. Nevada Health Link kept telling him he was enrolled, but UnitedHealthcare said he wasn’t in their system.

Basich’s predicament went critical on Dec. 31, when he had a heart attack. His treatment, which included a triple bypass on Jan. 3, resulted in $407,000 in medical bills in January and February that no insurer is covering.

Basich and his insurance broker, Tamar Burch of Branch Benefits Consultants, said the issue appears to be confusion at the state exchange. Xerox’s system says Basich chose a plan from another insurer, Nevada Health CO-OP, even though Basich has paperwork that shows he selected MyHPNSilver1. In short, Xerox can’t seem to decide where Basich belongs, Burch said.

So the exchange is trying to compromise, putting Basich with Nevada Health CO-OP for January and February, when he incurred his bills, and with UnitedHealthcare from this month on. But CO-OP officials say Basich is not their member.

Turdacious · Post by **Turdacious** » Wed Mar 19, 2014 4:27 am

I wonder what Mr. Basich's Senator says about that?

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Thursday said Republican complaints about President Obama’s unpopular health-care law are not valid criticisms, but rather “jokes.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/07/reid- ... z2wNamvR3s

IGX

500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code

Re: 500 Million Lines of Code