Things Governments do that make you say WTF!

[schlmoe]

I've had this idea for a new thread for a long time. Even though I'm cynical and think that "I've heard it all", there is still enough idealism in me to yell "WTF are you idiots doing" when I read about $700 hammers that the DoD bought, or that multi-million dollar "bridge to nowhere" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravina_Island_Bridge).

I would hope that this does not degenerate into partisan bickering because there is a ton of non-partisan stupidity occurring I think my main goal is for this thread to serve as a wake up call to remind us all the importance of voting. Not just the glamorous elections (President, Senate, etc.), but the elections that barely nobody pays attention to...the elections that could end up costing us just as much or more as the boneheads in DC cost us. School Boards, Utility Boards, Bond initiatives, etc.

You don't even have to go to DC to find examples like this, and it doesn't even have to be a spending issue. So, I'll start it off:

LAUSD launches its drive to equip every student with iPads

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-laus ... 6926.story

Two local elementary schools became the first to roll out tablet computers Tuesday in a $1-billion effort to put iPads in the hands of every student in the Los Angeles Unified School District. The district's 650,000 students, from kindergarten on up, are supposed to receive them over the next year or so.
L.A. schools Supt. John Deasy has pushed for the technology, which will cost about $1 billion — half of that for the Apple tablets and about half for other expenses, such as installing a wireless network on every campus.
The district is paying $678 per device — higher than tablets cost in stores — with pre-loaded educational software that has been only partially developed. The tablets come with tracking software, a sturdy case and a three-year warranty.

IMO, there are so many issues here, but here is a start:

• 
  Little or no guidelines on how teachers are to use the iPads (they got 3 days training)
  "partially developed" software???
  Paid for with 25 year "construction" bonds on an item with a shelf life of 1-2 years?
  Lost, stolen, or broken iPads?
  Security?

I'm all for technology in the classroom, but couldn't the money be better spent on desktops, refurb desktops, repurposed desktops (maybe with linux?), etc.

Even though this is new initiative, problems have already cropped up:

Who pays if L.A. Unified students lose or break iPads?

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-ipad ... 6726.story

L.A. Unified board grapples with the question of whether to force parents to pay for damaged or lost iPads. It's uncertain whether responsibility was made clear to all parents.

L.A. students breach school iPads' security

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-laus ... 6924.story

It took exactly one week for nearly 300 students at Roosevelt High School to hack through security so they could surf the Web on their new school-issued iPads, raising new concerns about a plan to distribute the devices to all students in the district.
Similar problems emerged at two other high schools as well, although the hacking was not as widespread.

It could be said that since I don't have any kids or live in California, I don't have a dog in this hunt. Not true. Due to the large Federal monies distributed to all public schools, we all pay. In any school district, the more money spent on crap, the less of our (Federal) taxes are spent on more worthwhile and long term items.

 

[JerryBoBerry]

Interesting article. My sister in law is a principal here in Missouri. They already did the same thing last year across her entire district. High school students already have them and the plan is over the next few years to get every student an iPad all the way down to 4th grade.

What the article didn't explain very well is overall this is expected to SAVE the district money. My sister is somewhat of a bargain hunter so she negotiated with a dealer when they ordered the first pallet of tablets. But she did get the same 3 year warranty and she also got protective covers for each.

So far it's been a great program. Books, quizzes, homework assignments, everything can be done digitally now. The teacher in each room has access to all their students iPads. She can send out homework to all of them at the same time. Give timed quizzes right in class.
Grading is automatic in a lot of non-subjective cases. And the students have cloud storage of everything they do now for every class for every year they are in school. All the same cloud. So when they graduate they can zip up their directory and have a complete portfolio of everything they have done in school.

So far the school is really liking it. I honestly don't see them ever going back to paper books and supplies anymore.

 

[Sevrin]

All that money would be better spent on teachers' salaries. Kids need to learn to think for themselves logically, analytically and critically, to manage their time, and to learn about how the world they live in got to be that way. For that, you need teachers, many of whom get little thanks beside their paychecks.

From what I've seen, a large proportion of young kids don't learn more about the computer technology they are given access to beyond what they need to post pictures on social media and spend money shopping online, and that can be taught in an hour or less.

 

[schlmoe]

It is very good to get feedback like that...but there is a GIGANTIC difference in giving these to high school age, versus giving them to kindergarten age and up.

It was pretty neat to read your story on taking an iPad to college (savings, etc.) and nice to read about your sister's experience. But, I am still a little skeptical that this will save the district money. If this can replace books, pencils, and paper, it surely could. I just don't see that happening in the near future.

And all (or almost all, maybe not homework) the advantages you listed could be achieved with cheaper equipment (desktops) that remain at the school.

 

[AmberCutie]

So. Stupid.

 

[Bocefish]

The Nine Most Terrifying Words in the English Language...





















I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

 

[JerryBoBerry]

It is very good to get feedback like that...but there is a GIGANTIC difference in giving these to high school age, versus giving them to kindergarten age and up.

It was pretty neat to read your story on taking an iPad to college (savings, etc.) and nice to read about your sister's experience. But, I am still a little skeptical that this will save the district money. If this can replace books, pencils, and paper, it surely could. I just don't see that happening in the near future.

And all (or almost all, maybe not homework) the advantages you listed could be achieved with cheaper equipment (desktops) that remain at the school.

But that's the thing. For the seniors last year there were no books, no papers, no pencils....you name it. They had their iPads. That's it. Basically the graduating class spent their last year of school completely paperless. And they have to take them home to do homework on them as well, so just having computers at school wouldn't work.
One of the nice things about this approach is it levels the playing field for poor and wealthy students. Every student now has everything they need for what is taught in school.

The only major change i can see coming to this approach is google just opened up a teaching division trying to get more learning software developed for the android market. Right now apple is so far ahead in that field it's ridiculous. Once they catch up i see more androids being used. Then cheaper tablets could become the norm.

I tend to really like this system and hope it gets adopted even further. But keep in mind i'm biased towards it. Not only do i have the sister who is doing it but i've also spent the last year doing the same thing (paperless, all books, notes and homework) on a Galaxy Note tablet at college. So i've seen the massive benefits first hand. I'd never go back.

As for the younger grades, 3rd and under, i agree it's not beneficial for them yet.

 

[Bocefish]

Things Governments do that make you say WTF!

 

[Just Me]

Things Governments do that make you say WTF!

Out of context statements on Fox news are certainly WTF worthy. :thumbleft:

 

[Bocefish]

Things Governments do that make you say WTF!

Out of context statements on Fox news are certainly WTF worthy. :thumbleft:

What part of "We have to pass the bill to find out what's in it" is out of context?

She didn't know WTF was in the thousands of pages of that bill... yet she stood up there like she was doing something righteous.

Dipshits deserve the government they elect.

 

[Just Me]

Things Governments do that make you say WTF!

Out of context statements on Fox news are certainly WTF worthy. :thumbleft:

What part of "We have to pass the bill to find out what's in it" is out of context?

She didn't know WTF was in the thousands of pages of that bill... yet she stood up there like she was doing something righteous.

Dipshits deserve the government they elect.

They whole sentence is out of context, it does not show what she said before or after. You do know what out of context means? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_quoting_out_of_context
I also hope you know how our government works. Pelosi is part of the House of Representatives there is also the Senate which had not passed or been handed a bill yet. Until that happened there was nothing to debate and no one truly knew what would be voted on.

 

[eyeteach]

Things Governments do that make you say WTF!

Out of context statements on Fox news are certainly WTF worthy. :thumbleft:

What part of "We have to pass the bill to find out what's in it" is out of context?

She didn't know WTF was in the thousands of pages of that bill... yet she stood up there like she was doing something righteous.

Dipshits deserve the government they elect.

They whole sentence is out of context, it does not show what she said before or after. You do know what out of context means? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_quoting_out_of_context
I also hope you know how our government works. Pelosi is part of the House of Representatives there is also the Senate which had not passed or been handed a bill yet. Until that happened there was nothing to debate and no one truly knew what would be voted on.

Pelosi was Speaker of the House and as such should have known what was in that bill, especially when her own party was pushing the ACA so hard. The fact she had no idea at the time exactly what was in that monstrosity speaks volumes about what a batshit crazy person she is.

 

[Shaun__]

Pelosi was Speaker of the House and as such should have known what was in that bill, especially when her own party was pushing the ACA so hard. The fact she had no idea at the time exactly what was in that monstrosity speaks volumes about what a batshit crazy person she is.

If you payed attention in civics class you would know the House passes a bill and sends it to the Senate for review. The Senate can then pass it unaltered to the president or send back its own version to the House for consideration. The House cannot know the contents of a finished bill, until the Senate agrees on it with them.

 

[eyeteach]

Pelosi was Speaker of the House and as such should have known what was in that bill, especially when her own party was pushing the ACA so hard. The fact she had no idea at the time exactly what was in that monstrosity speaks volumes about what a batshit crazy person she is.

If you payed attention in civics class you would know the House passes a bill and sends it to the Senate for review. The Senate can then pass it unaltered to the president or send back its own version to the House for consideration. The House cannot know the contents of a finished bill, until the Senate agrees on it with them.

Not only did I pay attention in civics I taught it, both at the high school and college level. The Speaker didn't know what was in the bill and should have as her own party at the time controlled both houses of Congress and occupied the Oval Office. Are seriously insinuating she had absolutely no idea what the Senate would put in that bill? Really? Pilosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid conversed every day with the White House about that bill and still goose-stepped in line when told to do so. She locked the opposing party out of negotiations during the formation of the massive black hole known as the ACA and had the temerity to refer to those who oppose it as "artificial." She knew what was included in a bill she helped to craft, she didn't want to admit what we knew then and what's been confirmed now: American's WILL pay more for their health care and may not be able to keep their primary physician...among other things.

Say what you will, it's obvious you and I are on opposing sides of this issue, but Nancy Pilosi is at the head table of the bat-shit crazy conference. Btw, sitting at that table with her are Harry Reid, John Mccain, John Boehner, Chuck Schumer, BHO, et al.

 

[Shaun__]

Pelosi was Speaker of the House and as such should have known what was in that bill, especially when her own party was pushing the ACA so hard. The fact she had no idea at the time exactly what was in that monstrosity speaks volumes about what a batshit crazy person she is.

If you payed attention in civics class you would know the House passes a bill and sends it to the Senate for review. The Senate can then pass it unaltered to the president or send back its own version to the House for consideration. The House cannot know the contents of a finished bill, until the Senate agrees on it with them.

Not only did I pay attention in civics I taught it, both at the high school and college level. The Speaker didn't know what was in the bill and should have as her own party at the time controlled both houses of Congress and occupied the Oval Office. Are seriously insinuating she had absolutely no idea what the Senate would put in that bill? Really? Pilosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid conversed every day with the White House about that bill and still goose-stepped in line when told to do so. She locked the opposing party out of negotiations during the formation of the massive black hole known as the ACA and had the temerity to refer to those who oppose it as "artificial." She knew what was included in a bill she helped to craft, she didn't want to admit what we knew then and what's been confirmed now: American's WILL pay more for their health care and may not be able to keep their primary physician...among other things.

Say what you will, it's obvious you and I are on opposing sides of this issue, but Nancy Pilosi is at the head table of the bat-shit crazy conference. Btw, sitting at that table with her are Harry Reid, John Mccain, John Boehner, Chuck Schumer, BHO, et al.

Republicans are not in a good position to talk about mental health. Their representatives have voted over 40 times to repeal ACA, and yet they have never had the votes to do it. A sane person might ask why they have not offered an alternative to the American people to fix our health crisis.

 

[CallMeWilliam]

Out of control thread in 3.. 2.. 1.. Oh shit it already happened...

 

[Bocefish]

Things Governments do that make you say WTF!

Out of context statements on Fox news are certainly WTF worthy. :thumbleft:

Here's her entire statement:

You’ve heard about the controversies within the bill, the process about the bill, one or the other. But I don’t know if you have heard that it is legislation for the future, not just about health care for America, but about a healthier America, where preventive care is not something that you have to pay a deductible for or out of pocket. Prevention, prevention, prevention—it’s about diet, not diabetes. It’s going to be very, very exciting. But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.

Doesn't change anything.

http://kff.org/interactive/health-track ... e-act-aca/

 

[eyeteach]

Pelosi was Speaker of the House and as such should have known what was in that bill, especially when her own party was pushing the ACA so hard. The fact she had no idea at the time exactly what was in that monstrosity speaks volumes about what a batshit crazy person she is.

If you payed attention in civics class you would know the House passes a bill and sends it to the Senate for review. The Senate can then pass it unaltered to the president or send back its own version to the House for consideration. The House cannot know the contents of a finished bill, until the Senate agrees on it with them.

Not only did I pay attention in civics I taught it, both at the high school and college level. The Speaker didn't know what was in the bill and should have as her own party at the time controlled both houses of Congress and occupied the Oval Office. Are seriously insinuating she had absolutely no idea what the Senate would put in that bill? Really? Pilosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid conversed every day with the White House about that bill and still goose-stepped in line when told to do so. She locked the opposing party out of negotiations during the formation of the massive black hole known as the ACA and had the temerity to refer to those who oppose it as "artificial." She knew what was included in a bill she helped to craft, she didn't want to admit what we knew then and what's been confirmed now: American's WILL pay more for their health care and may not be able to keep their primary physician...among other things.

Say what you will, it's obvious you and I are on opposing sides of this issue, but Nancy Pilosi is at the head table of the bat-shit crazy conference. Btw, sitting at that table with her are Harry Reid, John Mccain, John Boehner, Chuck Schumer, BHO, et al.

Republicans are not in a good position to talk about mental health. Their representatives have voted over 40 times to repeal ACA, and yet they have never had the votes to do it. A sane person might ask why they have not offered an alternative to the American people to fix our health crisis.

I can not agree more with your statement re: mental health.

 

[Just Me]

Pelosi was Speaker of the House and as such should have known what was in that bill, especially when her own party was pushing the ACA so hard. The fact she had no idea at the time exactly what was in that monstrosity speaks volumes about what a batshit crazy person she is.

If you payed attention in civics class you would know the House passes a bill and sends it to the Senate for review. The Senate can then pass it unaltered to the president or send back its own version to the House for consideration. The House cannot know the contents of a finished bill, until the Senate agrees on it with them.

Not only did I pay attention in civics I taught it, both at the high school and college level. The Speaker didn't know what was in the bill and should have as her own party at the time controlled both houses of Congress and occupied the Oval Office. Are seriously insinuating she had absolutely no idea what the Senate would put in that bill? Really? Pilosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid conversed every day with the White House about that bill and still goose-stepped in line when told to do so. She locked the opposing party out of negotiations during the formation of the massive black hole known as the ACA and had the temerity to refer to those who oppose it as "artificial." She knew what was included in a bill she helped to craft, she didn't want to admit what we knew then and what's been confirmed now: American's WILL pay more for their health care and may not be able to keep their primary physician...among other things.

Say what you will, it's obvious you and I are on opposing sides of this issue, but Nancy Pilosi is at the head table of the bat-shit crazy conference. Btw, sitting at that table with her are Harry Reid, John Mccain, John Boehner, Chuck Schumer, BHO, et al.

So which is it? Did she know what was in the bill or not?

She never makes the claim that she didn't know what is in the bill. What upsets certain news organizations and political affiliations is that she stated that "we", as in the american people, would not know what was in the bill until it was passed. Which is a true statement. Again with the civics, if the House did not pass the bill and send it to the Senate we would not know what was in the bill. The House bill had a public option in it, which does not appear in the ACA because the Senate took/negotiated it out. To say that she knew what the final law would look like is disingenuous.

Nothing has been confirmed that we will pay more for health care. In fact many sources say the opposite.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/25/us-usa-healthcare-exchanges-idUSBRE98O03P20130925

Debate over whether Obamacare will prove affordable for millions of uninsured Americans has intensified in the past few months, as states have announced rates. States that have supported the law said it would lead to lower prices. Others that have opposed the reform - including Georgia, Florida, and Indiana - warned of "rate shock" for consumers compared with what they could buy on the individual insurance market a year ago.

HHS said the average price was 16 percent lower than its own projections on premiums. In addition, consumers who earn up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level, or $62,040 for a couple, will qualify for subsidies that will lower the price further.

 

[Shaun__]

Nothing has been confirmed that we will pay more for health care. In fact many sources say the opposite.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/25/us-usa-healthcare-exchanges-idUSBRE98O03P20130925

Debate over whether Obamacare will prove affordable for millions of uninsured Americans has intensified in the past few months, as states have announced rates. States that have supported the law said it would lead to lower prices. Others that have opposed the reform - including Georgia, Florida, and Indiana - warned of "rate shock" for consumers compared with what they could buy on the individual insurance market a year ago.

HHS said the average price was 16 percent lower than its own projections on premiums. In addition, consumers who earn up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level, or $62,040 for a couple, will qualify for subsidies that will lower the price further.

I think some people will have to pay more, and some other people will have to pay less. I still would have rather had a single payer plan payed for with a VAT on various things.

 

[Dante]

Yep, I have to pay for blood work, and any test work in general now. Oh well, that's another 50 dorra per doctor visit.

 

[Akabu]

Interestingly, I believe Ted Cruz said the same thing (toward the "we pass it to find out what's in it" discussion) in his mock filibuster.

On the original subject, I think a partial government shutdown is at least a little WTF worthy.

 

[Red7227]

 

[RoseCavilla]

Nothing has been confirmed that we will pay more for health care. In fact many sources say the opposite.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/25/us-usa-healthcare-exchanges-idUSBRE98O03P20130925

Debate over whether Obamacare will prove affordable for millions of uninsured Americans has intensified in the past few months, as states have announced rates. States that have supported the law said it would lead to lower prices. Others that have opposed the reform - including Georgia, Florida, and Indiana - warned of "rate shock" for consumers compared with what they could buy on the individual insurance market a year ago.

HHS said the average price was 16 percent lower than its own projections on premiums. In addition, consumers who earn up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level, or $62,040 for a couple, will qualify for subsidies that will lower the price further.

I think some people will have to pay more, and some other people will have to pay less. I still would have rather had a single payer plan payed for with a VAT on various things.

One way or another Obamacare is going to end up costing every taxpayer more what with the whole government shutdown. I wonder if politicians are better at screwing women that aren't their wives or screwing their country.

 

[MrRodry]

Oh Canada... I understand the U.S.A doing that but you too... :naughty:

Canadian spies targeted Brazil’s Mines and Energy Ministry: report

A Brazilian television report that aired Sunday night said Canadian spies targeted Brazil’s Mines and Energy Ministry.

The report on Globo television was based on documents leaked by former U.S. National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden and was the latest showing that Latin America’s biggest country has been a target for U.S., British and now Canadian spy agencies.

The report said the metadata of phone calls and emails from and to the Brazilian ministry were targeted by the Communications Security Establishment Canada, or CSEC, to map the ministry’s communications, using a software program called Olympia. It didn’t indicate whether emails were read or phone calls were listened to.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper would neither confirm nor deny the allegations when asked to respond to the report late Sunday night.

The “CSEC does not comment on its specific foreign intelligence activities or capabilities,” said Harper’s communications director Jason MacDonald.

Brazilian Mines and Energy Minister Edison Lobao told Globo that “Canada has interests in Brazil, above all in the mining sector. I can’t say if the spying served corporate interests or other groups.”

American journalist Glenn Greenwald, based in Rio de Janeiro, worked with Globo on its report. Greenwald broke the first stories about the NSA’s global spy program focusing on Internet traffic and phone calls.

Globo previously reported that the communications of Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff and also state-run oil company Petrobras were targeted by NSA spying.

Earlier, Greenwald wrote articles in the O Globo newspaper saying that the NSA was gathering metadata on billions of emails, phone calls and other Internet data flowing through Brazil, an important transit point for global communications.

The fallout over the spy programs led Rousseff last month to cancel a planned visit to the U.S., where she was to be the guest of honour for a state dinner.

Rousseff last month spoke at the United Nations General Assembly and called for international regulations on data privacy and limiting espionage programs targeting the Internet.

from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nat ... e14719807/

 

[Shaun__]

Oh Canada... I understand the U.S.A doing that but you too... :naughty:

Canada's mining industry has always gone against the view I have of Canada in my mind. I guess the love of money makes some things universal.

 

[Brad]

Looks like that iPad thing is going well.
:roll:

http://games.yahoo.com/blogs/plugged-in ... 50244.html

 

[God]

i visited a country where kissing someone who is not your spouse will get you thrown in jail. they will let you out of jail if you agree to marry the person you kissed when it happened.

 

[God]

I've had this idea for a new thread for a long time. Even though I'm cynical and think that "I've heard it all", there is still enough idealism in me to yell "WTF are you idiots doing" when I read about $700 hammers that the DoD bought

first of all, i was in the military so i know why they would buy those kind of hammers.

second of all, i had to use those kind of hammers when my life was in danger.

third of all, other people standing near me had their lives in danger when i was using those kind of hammers.

fourth of all, there is a reason they have to use that kind of hammer.

 

[Poker_Babe]

The Forum's Top Conspiracy Nut would like to chime in on this whole Ipad thing (if I may)...
There is a much more sinister reason behind wanting to get every student an ipad here, and that reason is for another "track, trace, and database" system. Not only is everything the kid has ever done in high school going to be in this system, but it's also going to be used as a tool to spy on the students and even scan their finger prints (it is a touch pad remember). They may not implement this right away of course, but mark my words... it's coming!!!