Slashdot Mirror
California + Oracle = $95 Million Fiasco
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?
California did sign the agreement. Oracle expects them to abide by the contract. California should have thought a bit more before signing, perhaps, but there is no wrongdoing here. If they signed a contract to purchase 270,000 useless copies of Red Hat, no one would be complaining.
Are you saying we should just be complacent about it? Yeah, it happens all the time, but that doesn't mean we should get used to it.
slashdot!=valid HTML
We're in a recession and companies are STILL laying people off, yet California has the gall to blow $95M on too many licenses and software they don't need?
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.
Hammer of Truth
And of the $28 million that Logicon scammed, how much of that went to a kickback for the people who signed the contract?
No, there is no difference.
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
Oderint dum metuant
I think it's funny the mindset the gov't has gotten us into. If we get a refund, we think we're getting money from the gov't. If we have to pay, we think it's so unfair we're having to pay the gov't.
;-)
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?
--- witty signature
And then don't complain when your civil services go to hell (police response, road conditions, school quality)
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.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
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.
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.
SlashSigTheorem: Humorous, Political, Critical, Constructive- If you have a