Bush Outsourcing Government Jobs

[glockmail]

They outsourced IRS collections. No Bid Contract. They didn't have time? And the company cost more than they brought in? Dude, you are in denial over what the GOP have done over the past 8 years. .....

Provide evidence of your accusation, including cost comparison.

 

[sealybobo]

Again, all large contracts are publicly bid when time allows. The necessity of keeping secrets in preparation of war, however, may necessitate short term no-bids. When that happens the contractors accounting is open for detailed inspection by the contracting agency. These costs should be compared with the cost of the government performing the service themselves, which has to include the cost of a Draft, training the draftees, payment for as little as two years' service, followed by lifetime benefits.

Read the last part that says: And, Rummy and Chaney said, because of those weapons, the US must redirect billions of dollars away from domestic programs and instead give the money to defense contractors for whom these two men would one day work.

Again, I just wonder if you will be this naive when all the facts come out. You should already realize that the GOP fucked the American tax payers over the last 8 years. One day you might even get it that they did it on purpose. And they could only have gotten away with it by getting schmucks like you to defend them every step of the way. And I bet it really bothered you that Clinton lied about getting that BJ, huh?

What if there really was no need for much - or even most - of the Cold War? What if, in fact, the Cold War had been kept alive for two decades based on phony WMD threats?
And what if the world was to discover the most shocking dimensions of these twin deceits - that the same men promulgated them in the 1970s and today?
It happened.
Nixon worked out a truce with the Soviets, meeting their demands for safety as well as the US needs for security, and then announced to Americans that they need no longer be afraid.
But Nixon left amid scandal and Ford came in, and Ford's Secretary of Defense (Donald Rumsfeld) and Chief of Staff (Dick Cheney) believed it was intolerable that Americans might no longer be bound by fear. Without fear, how could Americans be manipulated?
And these two men - 1974 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Ford Chief of Staff Dick Cheney - did this by claiming that the Soviets had secret weapons of mass destruction that the president didn't know about, that the CIA didn't know about, that nobody but them knew about. And, they said, because of those weapons, the US must redirect billions of dollars away from domestic programs and instead give the money to defense contractors for whom these two men would one day work.
ThomHartmann.com - Hyping Terror For Fun, Profit - And Power

 

[sealybobo]

Provide evidence of your accusation, including cost comparison.

Ha! This is what you guys do! Start asking for links!!! I love it.

Remember, we told you for 8 years that the GOP was not working in America's best interest. WE TOLD YOU! And now you want links. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/14/b...06504000&en=4213dc6229fc58c9&ei=5070&emc=eta1

And I'm sure you will still defend Bush and the GOP.

The use of private debt collectors by the Internal Revenue Service is ineffective, the national taxpayer advocate told Congress yesterday, and the program should be canceled.


Private debt collection, according to the letter, has cost the I.R.S. $71 million in start-up costs through last year and has lost $50 million.


The program costs $7.65 million to run each year, she said, and the I.R.S. also pays private collectors $4.6 million in commissions, or around 25 cents on each dollar they bring in. That puts the cost of the program to more than $12 million a year.

Private debt collectors brought in $32 million in 2007, Ms. Olson said, but are expected to bring in as little as $23 million this year. When the costs are subtracted, the I.R.S. program may have less than $11 million in net revenues for 2008.

But there is a far greater cost, Ms. Olson argued.

If the more than $7 million in operating costs were put into the I.R.S.’s automated debt collection system — an existing program — the agency could bring in at least $91.8 million in net revenues, and possibly as much as $145 million — a much bigger return. Those figures do not include the commissions.

Ms. Olson argued that when calculated against that backdrop, private debt collection cost the government at least $81 million a year in revenue.

 

[glockmail]

Read the last part that says: And, Rummy and Chaney said, because of those weapons, the US must redirect billions of dollars away from domestic programs and instead give the money to defense contractors for whom these two men would one day work.

Again, I just wonder if you will be this naive when all the facts come out. You should already realize that the GOP fucked the American tax payers over the last 8 years. One day you might even get it that they did it on purpose. And they could only have gotten away with it by getting schmucks like you to defend them every step of the way. And I bet it really bothered you that Clinton lied about getting that BJ, huh?

What if there really was no need for much - or even most - of the Cold War? What if, in fact, the Cold War had been kept alive for two decades based on phony WMD threats?
And what if the world was to discover the most shocking dimensions of these twin deceits - that the same men promulgated them in the 1970s and today?
It happened.
Nixon worked out a truce with the Soviets, meeting their demands for safety as well as the US needs for security, and then announced to Americans that they need no longer be afraid.
But Nixon left amid scandal and Ford came in, and Ford's Secretary of Defense (Donald Rumsfeld) and Chief of Staff (Dick Cheney) believed it was intolerable that Americans might no longer be bound by fear. Without fear, how could Americans be manipulated?
And these two men - 1974 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Ford Chief of Staff Dick Cheney - did this by claiming that the Soviets had secret weapons of mass destruction that the president didn't know about, that the CIA didn't know about, that nobody but them knew about. And, they said, because of those weapons, the US must redirect billions of dollars away from domestic programs and instead give the money to defense contractors for whom these two men would one day work.
ThomHartmann.com - Hyping Terror For Fun, Profit - And Power

Wow what a rotational tirade. I'm dizzy trying to follow it.

 

[glockmail]

Ha! This is what you guys do! Start asking for links!!! I love it.

Remember, we told you for 8 years that the GOP was not working in America's best interest. WE TOLD YOU! And now you want links. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/14/b...06504000&en=4213dc6229fc58c9&ei=5070&emc=eta1

And I'm sure you will still defend Bush and the GOP.

The use of private debt collectors by the Internal Revenue Service is ineffective, the national taxpayer advocate told Congress yesterday, and the program should be canceled.


Private debt collection, according to the letter, has cost the I.R.S. $71 million in start-up costs through last year and has lost $50 million.


The program costs $7.65 million to run each year, she said, and the I.R.S. also pays private collectors $4.6 million in commissions, or around 25 cents on each dollar they bring in. That puts the cost of the program to more than $12 million a year.

Private debt collectors brought in $32 million in 2007, Ms. Olson said, but are expected to bring in as little as $23 million this year. When the costs are subtracted, the I.R.S. program may have less than $11 million in net revenues for 2008.

But there is a far greater cost, Ms. Olson argued.

If the more than $7 million in operating costs were put into the I.R.S.’s automated debt collection system — an existing program — the agency could bring in at least $91.8 million in net revenues, and possibly as much as $145 million — a much bigger return. Those figures do not include the commissions.

Ms. Olson argued that when calculated against that backdrop, private debt collection cost the government at least $81 million a year in revenue.

Wow we were talking about military contracts and you come back with the IRS. Try again!

 

[sealybobo]

Wow what a rotational tirade. I'm dizzy trying to follow it.

It's showing you a pattern. It's showing you the same way guys like Rumsfeld/Chaney used war to plunder the treasury, they did it to us the last 8 years.

 

[sealybobo]

Provide evidence of your accusation, including cost comparison.

No, I said this:

Originally Posted by sealybobo
They outsourced IRS collections. No Bid Contract. They didn't have time? And the company cost more than they brought in? Dude, you are in denial over what the GOP have done over the past 8 years. .....

And that's when you asked for proof of my accusations, and I provided a link about the IRS outsourcing.

So now that I caught you spinning/lying/avoiding the issue, stop doing it.

Stop trying to avoid the fact that for 8 years, you have been a great defender of the most treasonist/wasteful/corrupt government in American history.

You defended this, spying, taking away habius corpus, torture, war for profit, deregulations, cutting social programs, bushanomics, outsourcing, hiring illegals, etc.

 

[Ravi]

The funniest thing in the NPR story was the fact that the IRS is better at collecting than the companies they outsource to. How stupid to pay for a subpar product.

 

[sealybobo]

Wow we were talking about military contracts and you come back with the IRS. Try again!

The one article I found suggests that soldiers cost just as much as contractors. Probably because soldiers get VA benefits.

News reports of the study have largely focused on the total cost of U.S. contractors. The 190,000 contractors in Iraq and neighboring countries, from cooks to truck drivers, have cost U.S. taxpayers $100 billion from the start of the war through the end of 2008. Overlooked in this media coverage has been the sheer cost per soldier of keeping the army in Iraq. This per-soldier cost is more comprehensible and alarming than the rather abstract aggregate figure.


Whether in maintaining U.S. soldiers or private-sector contractors, the costs of occupation are enormous. With no end in sight, unending foreign wars do have one clear consequence: the eventual bankruptcy of the United States.

Breaking Down the Costs

The Stunning Costs of Keeping a Soldier's "Boots on the Ground" in Iraq | War on Iraq | AlterNet

But there are more private contractors in Iraq than there are soldiers.

 

[sealybobo]

The funniest thing in the NPR story was the fact that the IRS is better at collecting than the companies they outsource to. How stupid to pay for a subpar product.

Makes you think that Bush/The GOP don't really care about the tax payers, government or treasury.

Sort of makes me think they are in collusion with the Corporations they let bleed our treasury dry.

If this all wasn't on purpose, then it is gross neglegence.

That's why I can't even believe conservatives/republicans have the balls to suggest this crashed economy is Clinton's, carters, fanny or freddy's fault.

To me that's just laughable.

 

[glockmail]

The funniest thing in the NPR story was the fact that the IRS is better at collecting than the companies they outsource to. How stupid to pay for a subpar product.

Of course you ignore that the IRS probably outsourced its older, more difficult accounts.

 

[glockmail]

The one article I found suggests that soldiers cost just as much as contractors. Probably because soldiers get VA benefits......

Which is exactly what I was saying earlier.

 

[Navy1960]

Let me see if I understand this, it is now better to let the Federal Govt. run everything than to allow for the process of oursourcing Govt. jobs such as Federal Call centers for medicare, IRS Debt collection, and many many others? Tell me whoever is advocating that the Federal Govt. is better at this is doing so as a lark? You simply have to look at the many Federal Govt. programs to see how poorly a bloated, overstaffed, and rigid they are run. You wish an example, simply look at the USPS and the constant Billions lost each and every year that could simply be outsourced to Fed-X or even UPS and at a much lower cost. Want more, as a Vet have you ever compared the medical care at a VA facility and compared how well it is run as compared to a civilian medical facility? Want even more, look how long the Federal Govt. has been trying to upgrade the ATC system in this country and has so far spent billions to no avail. No I would rather have my tax dollars going to a company that employs Americans that not only do the job better but faster and are able to respond to needs quicker and do not spend my tax dollars recklessly. What needs to be done is to open the Bidding process, not close it in the name of hiring everyone to work for a central Govt. The GSA needs to be reformed in such a manner as to allow for bidding on contracts that are in the open and subject to review. If you wish all these services to be run by a Federal Govt. then be content the next time you take a trip on an airplane and stand in that TSA line and don't complain because those are your federal employee's at work.

Another thing worht mentioning here is that in the US Military outsourcing things that were done within the confines of the US Military tend to breakdown communications in force structure between combat units and logistics units. So a case can be made that tasks that have been over outsourced recently by the DoD need to be brought back into the US Military sphere of influence. However, then you run into a manpower issue that cannot be overcome without additional forces. That cannot be added without extended Guard units or a draft which IMHO will go over like a lead balloon with the general public not to mention that adding draftee's to the US Military force structure will decrease the US Military's ability to field professional units.

 

[sealybobo]

Which is exactly what I was saying earlier.

But what the GAO is finding out is that in most circumstances, we spent way more outsourcing jobs. In other words, Bush didn't do it to save money. He did it to rape the treasury. And with no oversite.

Either it was on purpose or gross neglegence.

And I hope you see the problem with having corporations making decisions that the government should be making. Example, why would Blackwater want to win the war in Iraq? They make profits from continuing the war. No wonder they want to stay longer than the Iraqi's want us there. There are even stories that I've heard, and you will eventually hear, where Blackwater made matters worse. Towns were willing to help us with the terrorists but then Blackwater went and killed a bunch of civilians. Next thing you know, the town is backing Mook Tada El Sadr. And I told you this stuff was happening but you scoffed the news because it came from a left news source. You don't care about truth, only politics. Well you see where that got us all. Corporations only care about profits. Our Government cares about the people's best interest. At least it did before Bush got into office. And hopefully it will again. Yes the government is the enemy. At least until Jan 20th.

You're going to see dozens of stories about how the Bush/Delay government let corporations run wild. Not only did they give them massive tax loopholes to take advantage of, they allowed them to pollute our rivers to save a buck. And you're going to find out BILLIONS were looted in Iraq. And all that money is unaccounted for. And white house emails have all been erased, even though that is against the law. What is the punishment for deleting emails? Much less than the punishment for purposely bleeding the treasury. They committed treason and you defended them. Rummy & Chaney worked for Nixon and yet you guys voted them back into office in 2000 and again on 2004 even despite the horrible job they did for the first 4 years. I say they did all this on purpose, you claim they did it out of stupidity. So why did you defend it for all 8 years?

PS. The Democratic and Republican parties are constantly changing entities. Do you get that? The Democrats haven't always been on the right side of the arguments, nor will they ALWAYS be on the right side of the argument. Also, the GOP hasn't always been corrupt and won't always be corrupt/wrong about everything. They just happen to be right now.

So, when you accuse me of being a partisan hack, just remember how much you defended the most corrupt government in US history.

And I never said the Democrats were perfect. I only said that the GOP was rotten. And boy did you defend them.

When I say YOU, I mean people like you.

 

[sealybobo]

Let me see if I understand this, it is now better to let the Federal Govt. run everything than to allow for the process of oursourcing Govt. jobs such as Federal Call centers for medicare, IRS Debt collection, and many many others? Tell me whoever is advocating that the Federal Govt. is better at this is doing so as a lark? You simply have to look at the many Federal Govt. programs to see how poorly a bloated, overstaffed, and rigid they are run. You wish an example, simply look at the USPS and the constant Billions lost each and every year that could simply be outsourced to Fed-X or even UPS and at a much lower cost. Want more, as a Vet have you ever compared the medical care at a VA facility and compared how well it is run as compared to a civilian medical facility? Want even more, look how long the Federal Govt. has been trying to upgrade the ATC system in this country and has so far spent billions to no avail. No I would rather have my tax dollars going to a company that employs Americans that not only do the job better but faster and are able to respond to needs quicker and do not spend my tax dollars recklessly. What needs to be done is to open the Bidding process, not close it in the name of hiring everyone to work for a central Govt. The GSA needs to be reformed in such a manner as to allow for bidding on contracts that are in the open and subject to review. If you wish all these services to be run by a Federal Govt. then be content the next time you take a trip on an airplane and stand in that TSA line and don't complain because those are your federal employee's at work.

Another thing worht mentioning here is that in the US Military outsourcing things that were done within the confines of the US Military tend to breakdown communications in force structure between combat units and logistics units. So a case can be made that tasks that have been over outsourced recently by the DoD need to be brought back into the US Military sphere of influence. However, then you run into a manpower issue that cannot be overcome without additional forces. That cannot be added without extended Guard units or a draft which IMHO will go over like a lead balloon with the general public not to mention that adding draftee's to the US Military force structure will decrease the US Military's ability to field professional units.

See, here is a guy who can't discuss this logically. His very first comment gives him away. See, it's either ALL or NOTHING. You said, "now better to let the Federal Govt. run everything".

See, no one said let the Government run everything. But that's the only way you are right. If I said that, then you'd have a point. But no one said that.

And if the IRS found a company that was efficient and saved the tax payers some money, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

This thread is about how the Bush government wasted a lot of money outsourcing to no bid contracts. The story stops short of accusing Bush of anything, other than neglegence. So if his intentions were good but it didn't work out, then admit that. But I say it was all done on purpose. Bush and all his NO BID buddies purposely raped the treasury. And that might be proven in the months/years to come. We shall see.

Fix the bloated government beurocracies, or outsource those jobs to private companies that will do a better job.

But what you are trying to ignore is that these corporations didn't do a good job and cost us more money. Why do you ignore this?

PS. If there was no USPS, how much do you think UPS would charge you to mail a letter?

 

[WillowTree]

[YOUTUBE]qmPN-gU9IJg[/YOUTUBE]





outsourcing is wonderful, it's a global thang.

 

[Navy1960]

See, here is a guy who can't discuss this logically. His very first comment gives him away. See, it's either ALL or NOTHING. You said, "now better to let the Federal Govt. run everything".

See, no one said let the Government run everything. But that's the only way you are right. If I said that, then you'd have a point. But no one said that.

And if the IRS found a company that was efficient and saved the tax payers some money, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

This thread is about how the Bush government wasted a lot of money outsourcing to no bid contracts. The story stops short of accusing Bush of anything, other than neglegence. So if his intentions were good but it didn't work out, then admit that. But I say it was all done on purpose. Bush and all his NO BID buddies purposely raped the treasury. And that might be proven in the months/years to come. We shall see.

Fix the bloated government beurocracies, or outsource those jobs to private companies that will do a better job.

But what you are trying to ignore is that these corporations didn't do a good job and cost us more money. Why do you ignore this?

PS. If there was no USPS, how much do you think UPS would charge you to mail a letter?

I don't believe I made any commentary on the Bush Administration in my posting however if some choose to read between the lines and make a bad leap of faith there then of course by all means be my guest. The point of my posting was really quite simple, that the Federal Govt. is by itself not very well equipped to offer services in a manner that are not overly expensive to the taxypayer, fail to deliver what is promised, and eventually become nothing but bloated havens for long term government employment. The point is that in many areas the private sector can and does a better job than the Federal Govt. and the only thing that needs to be overhauled is the contract process itself and not the very fact that the Federal Govt. awards those contracts.

I personally would not care if the cost of a letter was 50 cents if I had the comfort factor in knowing that it would arrive on time. Further, I would also end up saving on my tax bill because that money that went to pay for all those Govt. employee's that worked for the USPS would now go to the private sector who would do it cheaper and better, allowing me to be able to be able to afford the cost of the letter. One thing I failed to mention, here too is for all those who advocate that the Federal Govt. is better at providing services to the General public than the private sector, please provide me with the last year in which Amtrak turned a profit?

 

[xsited1]

No reason it couldn't.

In fact, being able to hand out sweet highly profitable contracts to private industries gives those in charge of our government far more power than simply hiring government employees to do those tasks.

Who do you suppose is making more money serving in Iraq?

The guys in uniform, or the guys working for Blackwater?

Are you suggesting that the government put an end to outside contracting and do everything internal?

 

[sealybobo]

the Federal Govt. is by itself not very well equipped to offer services in a manner that are not overly expensive to the taxypayer, fail to deliver what is promised, and eventually become nothing but bloated havens for long term government employment. The point is that in many areas the private sector can and does a better job than the Federal Govt. and the only thing that needs to be overhauled is the contract process itself and not the very fact that the Federal Govt. awards those contracts.

I believe Medicare is run efficiently. More efficiently than the HMO's and PPO's. The health insurance the politicians and seniors get. It's run pretty well.

And just because most government agencies have been run poorly, doesn't mean that has to be the way it is. Or, you don't take a government run thing and outsource it if it means it's going to cost us more money.

But if you are not defending Bush or what he did, then I agree with your premise. But he used your premise to get away with fleecing the treasury.

And I'm all for outsourcing things that make sense. Unfortunately, for the past 8 years, Bush has been outsourcing things to his buddies, and charging us a premium. It didn't save us money and in some cases, they had corporations making decisions that should have been left up to government officials. But since those officials were just Bushies, I guess it didn't matter that Corporations were making government decisions.

What you have said is all true and you make good points. Let's hope Obama outsources the right things and doesn't outsource things that are better left to the government.

Did you listen/read the story I provided at the beginning of this thread?

 

[sealybobo]

Are you suggesting that the government put an end to outside contracting and do everything internal?

Here is another conservative doing what I warned you they do.

They don't want to discuss what kind of jobs should and shouldn't be outsourced. They don't want to admit that Bush/The GOP outsourced work that ended up costing the tax payers more.

So instead they suggest that we want the government to do EVERYTHING when no one said that.

I think they did the same thing with Regulations. We kept telling them that Bush went too far with deregulations and they kept arguing that government wants to regulate everything!!!