Health care signup was fixed and now works well. I suppose your theory of government is great if the thought of companies like Intuit gouging private citizens to the tune of billion$ a year until the end of time gives you warm fuzzies. This canard that the government is congenitally incompetent and can never ever do anything as well as the sainted Private Sector needs to end.
Let's for a moment assume that the government sector is incompetent and couldn't build a workable software solution.
There's no reason they couldn't contract a private company to build the system, perhaps with a hand-over plan at the end of it with advice on how to build and manage a development team to maintain it in-house.
There are plenty of dev companies capable of doing this and doing it well. Put it up for tender.
> Let's for a moment assume that the government sector is incompetent and couldn't build a workable software solution.
Why?
I mean, presenting a specious premise such as "the government sector is incompetent" ignores the fact that whatever private company which offers tax preparation must, by definition, interact with IRS systems.
Unless your premise is that one or more startups can replace federal tax collection.
It's a rhetorical device: present an assumption favourable to the viewpoint you're arguing against and show that even with that assumption, the opposing view does not make sense.
I understand the rhetorical premise and retorted by identifying the logical flaw @Obversity presented thusly:
> There are plenty of dev companies capable of doing this and doing it well.
The position argued by both @Obversity and @tlb is that somehow "private companies" can satisfy what the IRS is required, by statute and Congressional oversight, to provide. "Private companies" are not subject to such constraints.
Hence my reductio ad absurdum conclusion of:
> Unless your premise is that one or more startups can replace federal tax collection.
You could bolster your claim that it's a canard by linking to several other US government-built websites doing as complex a job as filing taxes that are convenient and easy to use.
I mean their free file fillable forms is fine. I have used it for a number of years now and it is perfectly functional. Everyone points to how easy the big wigs are but I found the only difference is some slightly nicer phrasing and making it harder to miss EIC and such.
If they automatically filled in the information they had and fleshed out the calculator bits (like not making you use a tax table by hand) it would be a fine tool.
the US digital "corps" (not sure what they're called) is widely regarded, helping the VA if not healthcare.gov directly. people are even giving up vaunted Private Sector jobs to join them.
i have a feeling, if not defeated by anti government types they could do the job.
I certainly could -- but why should I hold myself to a higher standard of evidence than do you yourself? Also, you have moved the goalposts by now singling out the U.S. government.
It's explicitly designed and funded to be as such. The ENTIRE REST OF THE WORLD does these things, and here in the USA we claim the unique skill of an incompetent government that we somehow hold up to the rest of the world as a beacon of freedom and democracy. Does not compute.
I think the various indices of freedom (press freedom, human rights, etc) show convincingly that the U.S. is not a beacon, in any sense, of freedom. That freedom seems to be a stated goal of the founders in forming their government the way they did seems to be a mark of incompetence even in that regard.
My statement should not be construed to imply that Intuit handling it is morally superior (not only because of the incentive for corruption involved), even while the thought of using tax filing software written by government contractors makes me shudder.
It kind of depends on your definition of freedom. I'd say freedom of speech is stronger in the US than most of Europe. Europe has a lot of hate speech laws that limit freedom of speech more than in the US. Whether that's good or bad is subjective.
Freedom to own guns without many restrictions or permits is probably unique to the US.
Freedom to not have health insurance (mind you I prefer not having to worry about crushing medical debt in Germany, but it is a kind of freedom).
There's probably more than these 3,but for certain definitions of freedom the US is quite high.
You could say that Germany for example has a very different view of freedom. The government mandates that you get at least 4 weeks vacation, that you are insured at least half way properly, that you pay a lot more taxes for public goods (trains, roads, television, food subsidies, ...). This restricts the freedom of employers, your freedom to do with your money what you want, etc. but in return you have more freedom from debt traps, you have free time to go on vacation, you can get around the country without a car, etc.
So by limiting certain individual freedoms you can gain a different definition of freedom.
I've been working 16 hour days for a stretch here on a big project, so maybe this is just escaping me, but how is that different from stating that your savings account is incompetence?
My savings account doesn't come from me getting in between a citizen, and a vital-for-life service... Intuit's does, and they lobby aggressively to make everyone's lives harder, so that they can keep making millions from selling a glammed-up spreadsheet for $30/taxpayer.
