California + Oracle = $95 Million Fiasco 531
bahtama writes: "The Sacramento Bee is reporting that California apparently signed an agreement to purchase 95 million dollars worth of Oracle software that they really didn't need and that will not save them as much money as promised. They apparently purchased 270,000 licenses, which is more than all the state workers, including prison guards and others who would never need it." How do you think Oracle would treat the whole country?
Governments misspend taxpayer's money? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Governments misspend taxpayer's money? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Governments misspend taxpayer's money? (Score:2)
Re:Governments misspend taxpayer's money? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Governments misspend taxpayer's money? (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't get me wrong, these aren't perfect now, but all reducing the money does is choke off the wrong parts of government.
Re:Governments misspend taxpayer's money? (Score:2, Interesting)
Kintanon
Re:Governments misspend taxpayer's money? (Score:4, Insightful)
Are you saying the only way to have enough adequate funding for police is to have so much spare cash that Davis will mispend it on Oracle licenses?
I say tax the people only enough to support the essential services, and force Davis to pay for his own team of lawyers.
Re:Governments misspend taxpayer's money? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Governments misspend taxpayer's money? (Score:2)
Re:Governments misspend taxpayer's money? (Score:3, Insightful)
Does anyone know how much Gov. Davis got in campaign contributions from Larry Ellison and/or Oracle employees?
Then again, given Gov. Davis's views on whose money it is [latimes.com], the $95M in wasted funds doesn't surprise me even if Oracle isn't a big campaign donor.
Re:Governments misspend taxpayer's money? (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, I agree with you that my post up there probably wasn't worthy of a 4. A 3, tops. I don't generally follow campaign finance - which is why I asked if there was a connection between any Ellison-funded PACs and the Davis campaign. I figured someone would point me in the right direction - thanks for finding the info [calvoter.org]. As you point out, Oracle/Ellison doesn't show up in the top 25.)
As for bias, sure, I'm biased. I believe that Davis views his time as Governor of California as nothing more than a fundraising venue for an upcoming Presidential bid. I believe that's wrong from the point of view of providing sound management to Californians.
I further believe that when a politician starts to blather about how "the rich" aren't paying "their fair share", that they're looking to jack up taxes on the middle class to spend on their own pet projects.
In 1999 we reached at the point, federally, where the bottom 50% of the income curve pays 4% of the taxes, yet can outvote the top 50% of the income curve footing the other 96% of the bill. I believe that to be a recipe for long-term disaster for prudent fiscal policy - regardless of the party in power.
Finally, I believe that Davis' track record of mismanagement (MTBE will save the environment, bring it in! No, MTBE is bad, take it out! Each time, gouging oil companies for campaign funds with threatened legislation. Big power companies are gouging you! Let's sign long-term contracts that'll bankrupt us! No, that'll bankrupt them! No, let's bail 'em out!) speaks for itself.
I admire and respect Davis' skills as a master fundraiser and shrewd politician. His attacks on Riordan in the Republican primaries have given him a much easier opponent, as he can characterize Simon as "a millionaire", which rings very strongly as "an evil person" with his voting base. I don't for an instant think Simon has a hope in hell of unseating him.
(Of course, I don't think Riordan would have won either. At least the Davis/Simon matchup will be fun to watch this fall. A Davis/Riordan battle would have put me to sleep. So I'm actually looking forward to the this fall, as the campaign promises to be a great old-fashioned slugfest of ideas. I'm stocking up on popcorn and potato chips as I speak :-)
I live in California (Score:2)
This is the third year in a row that I got a refund from my Federal taxes, but I had to pay out to the state. I guess now I know why.
Re:I live in California (Score:4, Insightful)
Fact of the matter is, you pay both ways. Just in the former case you overpaid (free loan to the gov't), and in the latter case you didn't pay enough (not a free loan though, you may get penalized).
Automatic payroll deduction is one of the nastiest tricks the over-sized government has pulled on us! If we actually had to write out checks each year for the full amount we're *actually* paying, the government realizes there would be a tax revolt that very year. But take out a little each check, and no problem.
What's that example with the frog?
Re:I live in California (Score:2)
Don't get me wrong -- I'm not complaining about taxes, I was just making a joke. I consider the entire socio-religio-commercial-political-system of this world to be an (un-)necessary evil which I fully expect to be done away with, the sooner the better.
Re:I live in California (Score:5, Insightful)
When you fill out your 1040, it's BLATANTLY OBVIOUS how much you've paid.
For example, an MD friend of mine paid over 100,000 US Dollars in federal income taxes this year. Plus about $30,000 in property taxes, state and local income taxes.
I don't know much about his spending habits, but let's say he put $20,000 in the bank, and spent his remaining $150,000 on taxable goods and services. That means he also paid $10,500 in sales tax in his county. (In this case, he has no car or mortgage payments.)
So at the end of the year, he's paid almost a full half of his income to "the government." That is not American, my friends, that sounds like something the damn socialist frenchies and poppycockers overseas would do. (I love you guys, but your taxes suck even worse than ours. But not much.)
So when my wife's co-workers quit their jobs to raise babies (five of them in the past 18 months) and get public assistance in medical benefits, food, income, subsidized housing, etc... they tell us "The Government is taking care of me! It is great!" (My sister has also done this, twice.)
Bullshit. My father and I are paying for you to sit on your ass and watch Oprah and smoke Menthol Lights next to your newborn. And to get medical care. And to buy orange juice with food stamps so you can save your baby shower money for important stuff... like another carton of Menthols. These idiots think the government just "makes" the money... the clue train never bothers making a stop between their ears.
Sorry to be such a 20-something curmudgeon. Obviously not all people on public assistance are like this; just most of them. Get knocked up by your cousin's boyfriend and skate it out from there. No marriage, no commitment, no work, no worries. And they are OK with it, because the government is taking care of them. And you and I are paying for it. Yes we need social services, but we have bred an entire generation or subculture of people who can now live by the hard work of others who make btter decisions and handle the consequences to their actions without whining.
If you're in the US, and haven't had the pleasure of dealing with people like this yet, take a couple trips to WalMart at 2:00pm and see if you can apply this tale to the runny-nosed crotch-fruit being dragged around by some "poor, bedraggled" mommy. She has a vacant look on her face, you know why? She doesn't have to care anymore. About anything.
Except how to afford that next box of Menthols.
Re:tax withholding (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I live in California (Score:3, Insightful)
It's time for some Q&A.Let's start with familiar /. lore.
Q. Who invented the Internet?
A. The US federal gummint (DARPA)
Q. On whose dime?
A. The US taxpayers'
Q. What industry occupies the largest portion of the US federal government's trillions of dollars in expenditures?
A. Defense. 35% in 2001. Welfare and other means-tested entitlments were 6%.
Q. What has the US Dept. of Defense been focusing on since the end of the Cold War? A. Technology - computerized planes, satellites, drones, tanks, etc. Read any Afghanistan story in the Washington Post [washingtpost.com] or New York Times [nytimes.com], or any other major newspaper, and you will hear nothing but raves about our high-tech military.
Q. And who does that money employ?
A. Engineers, technologists, programmers.
Q. What do they make on average?
A. A starting salary of $60K, if not more [znet.com]
Q. Wow, Eric, sounds like the geeks get the most welfare of all! Why do you think they complain so much?
A. (stumped)
And don't even dare to complain how hard it is to figure out what the government spends - it took me 6 seconds to find the US budget [gpo.gov]. Whew!
Re:I live in California (Score:3, Informative)
(2001 Estimates)
Discretionary: $634
DoD $279
non-DoD $355
Mandatory: $993
Social Security: $355
Medicare and medicaid: $342
Means-tested entitlements: $111
Other: $123
Total: $1,835
(All number in Billions)
So we've got 15% for DoD (355/1835)
and 6% for means-tested (111/1835). So you got half of it right but distorted the other half. Non-DoD and Social Security were more than DoD and Medicare/Medicaid was almost as much.
So, it's an interesting chain you've strung but it doesn't hold together.
Re:I live in California (Score:2)
I think Larry probably needed the money to pay off all those San Jose Airport Noise Curfew fines [wired.com] he racked up.
Ok, old news... but still pretty funny.
Re:I live in California (Score:2)
Cali has been blowing money on all sorts of big government spending fiascos since I can remember. (Much of it in the name of environmentalism.)
Out of all 50 states, only CA thinks automobile emissions aren't good enough for them and imposes their own, stricter, rules.
Nevermind the fact that all the pollution control systems on modern automobiles eliminate 99% of the pollutants already. They have to get rid of another
Their bungled attempts at semi de-regulated power sure didn't help anyone out either.
Isn't there a community in CA that has the dubious distinction of being the only one in the U.S. that ran high-speed Internet via fiber to every single home - all paid for by taxes?
I'm sorry, but I'd rather pay my own way for *my* access than pay into a shared pot so everyone, including the unemployed beach bums living off welfare in subsidized housing, gets access.
Re:I live in California (Score:2)
See my other comment [slashdot.org] above.
I think you might be thinking of Muscatine, Iowa [mpw.org].Hmmmmm (Score:2, Funny)
Where is the suprise ? (Score:2)
How do you think Oracle et al make these huge amounts of cash. Is it via technical excellence or flogging to muppets on the golf course.
Actually apologies to Kermit he wouldn't be stupid enough. Barnum applies and these guys are just applying that law. Stupid people get fleeced, they should quit on grounds of low intellect.
Re:Where is the suprise ? (Score:2)
Sorry but just how this is a valid excuse for charging so damned much for an Oracle license? Were you expecting that a classroom full of college students were going to reinvent Oracle RDBMS over the course of a single semester? I had to write a circuit analysis program for a half-semester course. I doubt that anyone was expecting that a competitor to ECAP, LINCAD, or SPICE was going to result from that assignment. Geez.
So? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's right, they wouldn't be complaining, because how much would 270,000 installs of RedHat cost? $89.95, that's how much.
Re:So? (Score:2)
/sarcasm
I think it is pushing things just a bit to do a quarter-million installs with the same CD. If the software is valuable enough to run 270,000 systems, compensate the company fairly.
And people wonder why nobody can get a job as a programmer any more...
Re:So? (Score:2)
Um... don't forget that this is the government we're talking about. I mean, "ethics", is that some kind of joke?
--
Garett
Re:So? (Score:2)
Assuming they didn't want support for any install but one. Of course, if you don't want support at all why not just download it?
Wake up a little. If you are installing 270,000 copies of *anything* you go to the company and arrance some sort of support deal that is independant of the retail price.
Re:So? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So? (Score:2)
Oh come on, honestly... (Score:2)
There's a slight difference here. What an obvious troll... At least nobody seems to be complaining about Mexico City's software purchases [wired.com].
-B
Re:Oh come on, honestly... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oracle and California signed a contract, California was really REALLY stupid. I seriously doubt that Larry Ellison made California "an offer they couldn't refuse". Oracle is sure as hell not going to refuse the deal. They are a for profit company that sells software...
It is not the companies responsibility to police its customers. If someone comes to my company and offers us 3x what we normally charge for our services we will happily take the extra cash, so will every other company on the planet.
Caveat emptor...
dewke
Re:Oh come on, honestly... (Score:2, Funny)
Except maybe Bill Gates, who would rock back and forth and explain why they should actually pay 6x.
Re:So? (Score:5, Interesting)
The situation is not exactly clear yet, but the article leads me to believe that the state will claim that Oracle and this Logicon company thinger may have misrepresented themselves during the contract negotiation process. Misrepresentation is definitely something that can cause contract to get nullified:
"The disparity "raises the question that Logicon may have misled the state," the audit says. "The fact that Logicon appears to benefit by as much as $28.5 million from its role
We shall see what happens in court.
Wow!! (Score:2, Funny)
What is sad... (Score:3, Insightful)
State ID cards (Score:4, Funny)
Larry was just doing his patriotic duty (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Larry was just doing his patriotic duty (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Hrmm (Score:5, Interesting)
Acutally it sounds to me like California got a hell of a deal. $95,000,000 / 270,000 = $351.85 per license. I haven't purchased an Oracle license recently, but I thought they were more than $350 bucks a seat. Hrmm...
Re:Hrmm (Score:2)
9i Enterprise Edition
1 User (perpetual) $800
1 User (2-year) $280
1 User (4-year) $480
9i Standard Edition
1 User (perpetual) $300
1 User (2-year) $105
1 User (4-year) $180
You can also license per processor and not have to worry about named users, but that's VERY expensive ($40k for a perpetual EE 1-proc license)
Re:Hrmm (Score:2)
For a 4-year named-user license of the Enterprise version of Oracle 9i, you'd pay a rate of $480/person.
For the same thing for the Standard Edition, you'd pay a rate of $180/person.
Now think about this: That is the going rate without any bulk discounts (which they do offer, just not on their web-site). Also, their contract is for 6 years, not 4. Overall, this wouldn't be such a bad deal if they NEEDED that many licenses. They don't.
Eric
NYT Magazine article last weekend (Score:2)
My 2 cents....
Re:NYT Magazine article last weekend (Score:2, Interesting)
I have to agree with your assessment of Ellison - he comes across as incredibly pompous and arrogant individual, afflicted with the same overly-inflated sense of "I am right and you are wrong"-ness common to religious fanatics.
The best (worst) quote in that article is from him:
'I had one last question for Larry Ellison. ''In 20 years, do you think the global database is going to exist, and will it be run by Oracle?'' I asked.
''I do think it will exist, and I think it is going to be an Oracle database,'' he replied. ''And we're going to track everything.'''
Makes Bill seem all soft and fluffy in comparison.
Tig
i see this as a possible scenario... (Score:5, Funny)
"May I see your driver's license, proof of insurance, and your Oracle seat license please"
Does anybody remember that Futurama... (Score:4, Funny)
Why do I get the impression that there's quite a few Oracle employees who just exploded; and that California is going to be mightily pissed when they find that their new Oracle Software isn't going to come with quite as much Eagle as the salesmen promised...
Oracle cheating? not quite... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Oracle cheating? not quite... (Score:2)
Now I know where the "con" in "Logicon" comes from...
Re:Oracle cheating? not quite... (Score:5, Informative)
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Oracle's involvement in this particular clusterfuck...If they hadn't been so intent on proping up their 4th quarter numbers, the contract would most likely have gotten the review, and probably the subsequent shrieking gales of laughter it deserved.
Of course, a large helping of shame goes to the Gov't of Calif for letting Oracle/Logicon railroad them like that. This is the sort of thing 'due process' is meant to avoid.
Blame Oracle? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Blame Oracle? (Score:5, Insightful)
DOIT (Score:2, Funny)
"DOIT was set up to try to steer the state clear of contracting disasters,"
"DOIT ignored these signs," the audit says.
A spokesman for Elias Cortez, the state's chief information officer and the head of DOIT,
FNORD
Irony (Score:2, Insightful)
Let me get this straight... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sadly, fiscal responsibility in the government still seems to be generations away. If I still lived in Cali I'd try and get a proposition on the ballot that new expenditures over $(n)M have to be approved by the voter. Ditto for raises for elected officials, we should be able to fire these idiots as easily as we elect them.
Re:Let me get this straight... (Score:2)
Re:Let me get this straight... (Score:2)
Who knows how it happened. Shit like this has been going on in U.S. government for over 150 years. People wanting to make profits elsewhere, buy a shitload of near worthless merchandise that has already been tested and rejected elsewhere but some moron feels the need to do it on the other side of the country.
We are supposed to learn from history, not let it constantly repeat. I thought politicians were smart.
Re:Let me get this straight... (Score:2)
You're new to the planet, aren't you?
Re:Let me get this straight... (Score:2, Informative)
Do that and you'll never accomplish anything. Rarely does a community vote for referendums that will tax them more, even when things like schools, libraries and public works are desperately needed.
Ditto for raises for elected officials, we should be able to fire these idiots as easily as we elect them.
You obviously know little about democracy. If we did what you proposed we'd be no better than the ancient Athenians who let their "democracy" succumb to mob rule, where no one really ruled and the fate of any ruler was decided by the whim of a mob. And that's worse than wasting $95 million, recession or none.
Re:Let me get this straight... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't see how moving the democratic process back into the hands of THE PEOPLE could be considered mob rule!
The democratic process in this country doesn't entitle the populace to make every major decision. Rather, it allows you to pick your leader, who will then make those decision for an appointed period of time. If you don't like those decisions, either don't vote for him in the first place or don't vote to re-elect him.
If major decisions were made by the majority of the United States we probably would've nuked several Arab countries shortly after Sept. 11 and immediately sent in ground troops, then pulled them back as soon as someone died, effectively accomplishing nothing. If major decisions were made by a simple majority what would stop 51% of Serbs from killing 49% of Croats?
That doesn't sound democratic to me.
A pure democracy is a dangerous thing. The US isn't a democracy, it's a republic. Two quotes come to mind:
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner." --Anon
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" --Winston Churchill
Mr. Talking head in a suit making $250K/yr does NOT represent the majority.
Then why does the majority elect him? If you feel that you better represent the majority of voters then you should run for office and logically win! If not, get behind the candidate who most closely represents your views and vote for him or her. But instead of lamenting about the problems, use our democratic process for its advantages!
Good (Score:2)
Golden opportunity for the Golden state (Score:5, Interesting)
My dad works for the State of Maryland. I can't even imagine how many millions (billions?) of dollars MD could save if they just restructured the way they maintain information. Welfare records are still being maintained using PAPER spreadsheets. Auditing this information takes months. The savings in this area alone could justify such a purchase. Auditing time could be cut drastically. Code could be written to locate discrepancies in the data. This doesn't even take into account things like payroll systems which could be automated. Doing that would allow the state to eliminate the positions of the hundreds of people with little-to-no education they have working in their payroll department.
Bill Gates (love him or hate him) really hit the nail on the head in his book Business @ The Speed of Thought. It really outlines how technology can be used to increase the flow of information, while at the same time reducing the cost associated with acting on that information.
Maybe someone in the California government will take charge and turn this bad situation into a golden opportunity!
Re:Golden opportunity for the Golden state (Score:2)
What I'd really like to see happen is California take some initiative and put this software to good use! Yes, they've got WAY more licenses than they need.
What if California resold their many unused Oracle licenses, thus undercutting future Oracle sales? California won't lose any money because the licenses have already been paid for (or at least allocated budget for).
Re:Golden opportunity for the Golden state (Score:3, Insightful)
>
> Bill Gates (love him or hate him) really hit the nail on the head in his book Business @ The Speed of Thought. It really outlines how technology can be used to increase the flow of information, while at the same time reducing the cost associated with acting on that information.
>
>Maybe someone in the California government will take charge and turn this bad situation into a golden opportunity!
Why would they do that?
If a private sector employer did all its work on paper, having to hire thousands of unskilled workers and pay them benefits, it would have to raise prices (making competing products cheaper, driving its own customers away), or go bankrupt due to the higher expenses.
The government can't go bankrupt -- nor can its customers purchase their services from a competing government. It's a monpoly - not in the Gatesian sense, but in the guys-with-guns sense. You can always dump Windows for Linux, but try explaining that "Joe's Auto Licensing Inc" does a better job than your state DMV the next time you get pulled over and asked to show your driver's license!
The more folks a department in .gov hires, the more important the people who run that department become. The department's inefficient, slow, and costs too much to run? No problem! That just means we need more money! Who cares about the costs, we can always raise taxes, the taxpayer's good for the money.
And besides, what are the taxpayers gonna do, buy their schools, roads, and police and fire departments from someone else? That's illegal! (Whew, good thing we make the laws that control that part, or we'd be fucked! OK, you can buy your schools from someone else if you really wanna, but you still gotta pay for ours :-)
And the other stuff .govs do? Taxpayers buying their diversity training programs and social security and sensitivity classes and unemployment insurance and welfare from someone else? Hey, most people wouldn't buy those things at all. (Gee, also a good thing we can pass laws to make buying those things from us mandatory! :-)
Governments will modernize and eliminate waste when they have an incentive to eliminate that waste. The only incentive that's been shown to motivate such cost reductions is the profit incentive. (Kinda a tautology, no? Only people who care about making money care about not spending it.) The government - by defintion - has no profit incentive. The private sector - again by definition - is all about profit incentive.
So no, nobody in any government will "see this as a golden opportunity", because it's not an opportunity, because doing business at the speed of anything faster than a sloth on valium isn't what governments are about.
Re:Golden opportunity for the Golden state (Score:2, Insightful)
it won't happen because #1 government is stupid and hires stupid people.. (we elect stupid people, why should it change inside?)
The first Federal/State/Local laws that should be passed is that a Open/in-house solution must be researched first and left on the table along side all the other bidders.. and THEN it has to be voted on. (Let's see make this salesperson rich, or give 7 people good paying jobs and have complete control of the project... let's make dave here rich....)
it wont happen.. Just like how many corperations wont use open/free solutions (but the Techs do anyways... to hell with the CTO he dont know crap) until they see that they have been all along because of their employees did it silently.
Re:Golden opportunity for the Golden state (Score:4, Informative)
Ah. Everytime I hear "X can do everything Oracle can" it makes me smile.
You know why oracle charges so much money? You know why oracle's the second biggest software company? Sure it's partly marketing, but mainly Oracle markets itself. Oracle is the most powerful, scalable, and generally rock-steady-makes-toast-cuts-potatoes-in-3-styles database in the world by a long shot bar none.
Comparing postgressql to oracle is like comparing the JET engine and a
Re:Golden opportunity for the Golden state (Score:2)
Yes, but they're seat licenses. They have the ability to sit 270,000 state workers down at computers and all of them can use the database at once. Problem is, the state of california, once you discount the nontechnical workers, has far less than 270,000 employees. So they could've purchased far fewer licenses and still been able to perform the tasks you suggest. I'd cite some numbers, but I can't seem to find any numbers that nail down how many people do what for the state of California.
Maine: Use Free SAP-DB, Sybase, PG, or MySQL. (Score:2)
There's too many free db engines out there to ignore, plus Oracle may hinder license transfer.
Re:Golden opportunity for the Golden state (Score:3, Insightful)
It is, by the way, complexity that the parent post is talking about. Being able to increase the flow of information by putting information in a figure as well as text, or automatically generating a reference in LyX, or adding an easy scatter plot for your data with Excel. You simply can't do these things with a typewriter. Modern technology allows us to stream more information at people than ever before, and while this does have its obvious and many downsides, I don't think that the fact can be ignored.
And while you're right about the increased work hours, I don't feel that you can blame technology for it. After all, if we really wanted to work less, we would. But we don't, and we can't. The overall psyche of the nation is tooled in such a way that we have to work 60, 70, and 80 hour workweeks on average, no matter the consequences. This isn't because of technology, it's the modern mindset that is the cause of this, which runs far deeper.
Attention California (Score:5, Funny)
Fully licensed copies of Linux. Guaranteed uptime. The next generation of operating systems. Normally priced at $4k, yours today for the low low price of $2k per copy. Hurry and order now, supplies are limited. Order within the next 10 minutes and get a free mousepad with your order.
CALL NOW!
I want my US Citizen's ID card... (Score:2)
That they would take advantage of people stupid enough to let them? Am I missing something here?
Are we now supposed to support more legislation to protect people from their own stupidity?
Moot Point (Score:5, Funny)
This is sad... (Score:2)
I thought this was kind of sad, I mean they are basically screwed, so they might as well use some of the software.
But I guess they are just playing it safe in case the contract is nullified or something, which I highly doubt
It seems there are a lot of companies out there whose only business it seems is to fleece governments. There seems to be a serious lack of reading agreements before they sign them in the various governments.
Same thing in Toronto, ON (Score:2, Interesting)
What's ironic here... (Score:3, Informative)
What is the problem? (Score:2)
Governments need this kind of database power to be able to track every molecule of your body and every thought in your mind.
Do you want them to put it in a simple text file? Come on, let them do it professionally!
no big deal (Score:2, Funny)
Re:no big deal (Score:2)
Screw competing, I'm going to find something completely useless to sell to the government for millions.
Why I'm Libertarian (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm libertarian because I have no confidence in politicians, and this is a great example of why. Logicron screwed California. Why? As the saying goes, "A fool and his money are easily parted." Unless the fool is a government entity, because they can always raise taxes.
When a company makes a stupid purchase, the company suffers and may go under. Oh, well. A smarter company takes their place.
When a government makes the stupid purchase, taxpayers suffer and the politicians get a couple years to spin their way out of it before facing the next re-election. By then, voters are likely to have forgotten or given up.
The government is run by politicians and politicians are, well, political. Political does not imply any sort of managerial or financial sense.
Meanwhile....!!!! (Score:4, Funny)
I work for the California govt... (Score:2, Interesting)
They've spent hundreds of millions of dollars making the switch, and are spending more every day trying to keep it up to date and running.
California knows how to waste money.
Hah! (Score:2)
Oh really? (Score:5, Funny)
And what kinds of messes DO we sweep under the rug?
California's Wasting a Lot of Money These Days (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd be pretty pisssed off if I lived in the state...
They have 'CON' in their name (Score:2)
And in offtopic news (Score:3)
It's sort of a funny paradox, now the
Just a side note to the story I wanted to add, allmost ontopic.
Somebody on the inside . . . (Score:2)
Maybe CA isn't so innocent. (Score:2, Interesting)
Gartner Recommendations (Score:2, Interesting)
the question.. (Score:2)
The disparity "raises the question that Logicon may have misled the state," the audit says.
Raises the question?? I think it pretty much answers the question with a resounding yes..
They should have talked to me first. (Score:3, Funny)
Oh, what the heck. I'm bigger than that.
Guys --- if you manage to get yourself out of that Oracle boondoggle, I'll still be glad to get you PostgreSQL for $45 million.
I am such an old softie.
Re:Lesser of Two Evils? (Score:2)
Re:State wages (Score:2)
Huh? How would raising taxes to pay higher civil service salaries encourage civil servants to spend said money more wisely?
Most .gov bureaucrats would say "Wow, we have more money coming in. Better spend it!"
How about "when the state has to compete like a private industry by providing services in exchange for dollars (instead of just saying "all your tax dollars are belong to us" with the stroke of a pen), you'll get higher-quality decisions."
Re:at least the government waste (Score:2)
Well, half of it did. Oracle pays taxes on its profits, don't forget.
Lessee. Taxpayers earn $200M. Governments loot $100M. Government spends $100M on Oracle warez. Oracle makes $100M more profit (hey, how much does it cost 'em to stamp 1000 CDs?) Governments loot $50M of Oracle's $100M.
Net result: Taxpayers produce $200M of wealth. Taxpayer-to-Oracle subsidy of $50M. Taxpayer-to-Government subsidy of $50M.
OK, I suppose you're right - that's better than a Taxpayer-to-Government subsidy of $100M. At least...
> I would rather the money be in private hands than in public hands (so do a lot of other people, its called the stock market).
As you say, though, if the net effect is that the government keeps $50M of taxpayer dollars, I'd still much rather the government merely content itself to loot only $50M of taxpayer money to begin with, and let me decide where to put the other $50M.
Re:at least the government waste (Score:5, Informative)
Bullshit [yahoo.com].
1Q01: $903M income before tax, $320M income tax expense.
2Q01: $1.32B income before tax, $470M income tax expense.
3Q01: $785M income before tax, $275M income tax expense.
4Q01: $845M income before tax, $295M income tax expense.
Your political bias is showing. (OK, so's mine. Guilty as charged. ;-) But corporations pay assloads of tax too.
Re:at least the government waste (Score:3, Insightful)
Um, Bullshit on you. Look at gross proceeds:
4Q01: 2.357 BILLION
3Q01: 2.242 BILLION
2Q01: 3.263 BILLION
1Q01: 2.674 BILLION
That's an average tax rate of 12.9% on gross income.
When's the last time anyone who isn't on WIC paid only 12.9% federal tax on their gross income after deductions?
Re:at least the government waste (Score:2)
Where do you think tax dollars usually go? Rocketed into the sun, never to be seen again?
The government always spends money on private goods and salaries, and then the private companies pay the salaries of employees, from which taxes are paid. Round and round it goes -- its not like government removes money from the cycle.
Re:Larry really is a good guy... (Score:2, Interesting)
The worst part is that they aren't even selling software so much as licenses. The "sell organizations a bunch of numbers that enable them to use software they already have" business model isn't illegal, of course, but it is morally reprehensible. I'm not just talking about oracle, I'm talking about the whole concept of license-based profit models. *glares north toward the evil empire of redmond*
Who was the auditor? (Score:2, Funny)