5 ms·
Dear USA Facts team, we would like to offer you few hints for public spending visualizations based on our experience. We are the creators of https://us.wikibudg
by dandare 10y ago
Dear USA Facts team, we would like to offer you few hints for public spending visualizations based on our experience. We are the creators of https://us.wikibudgets.org/w/united-states-budget-2016 https://us.wikibudgets.org/w/united-states-budget-2016.
- Government spending is only a small part of the public finance. People need to see all public organisations: states and cities, departments, offices, bureaus and agencies, schools, hospital and prisons and obviously all public benefit corporations. If they spend our money we have the right to see their budgets.
- Governmental organisations borrow money outside of the government budget(!). This increases the government debt but does not show in the deficit. Just because the deficit is smaller than last year does not mean the debt is not growing faster.
- There is a world outside the US. The internet needs a one time stop for all public spending of the world, not just the US. Also you may want to connect the government receipts and expenditures from/to the international organisations, OSN, World Bank, the foreign aid etc.
- Public spending and receipts do not follow a tree hierarchy, it is a pseudograph. You will have to deal with so called offsetting receipts, extra budgetary fees, negative expenditures, positive taxes, transfers between organisations etc. We believe the only suitable visualisation style is a sankey diagram.
- There are huge size differences between individual budget items. Inside the executive branch you do not want to hide the $3 million sent to Marine Mammal Commission (https://us.wikibudgets.org/w/united-states-budget-2016?n=f224f7560 https://us.wikibudgets.org/w/united-states-budget-2016?n=f22...) but you can not realistically show it next to the $7.52 billion sent to the Railroad Retirement Board (https://us.wikibudgets.org/w/united-states-budget-2016?n=3caea97da https://us.wikibudgets.org/w/united-states-budget-2016?n=3ca...). We solved this by a zoomable interface. (They call it the universe of public spending so let's give them a map!)
- The federal government does not even have a definite list of all governmental agencies. I am not kidding.
- You will never get all the data but you could build a wiki platform where city officials, school principals, government employees etc contribute with their bits and pieces. They can connect their receipts to the spendings of the superior organisations. If it does not match, citizens can investigate why. (If you want ordinary people to contribute with data you may need a human friendly editor too.)
- Different data dimensions will be useful to different people. Show the spending by agency, by programme, by function, by geography, by source etc. Let people combine the dimensions and create custom aggregates.
- Let people seamlessly share custom views and comparisons to social media (with relevant OG tags). We have a fake news industry to fight.
We wish you best luck.
- ChuckMcM 10y agoI don't think this comment is particularly helpful. Sure there different ways to slice and dice this but the data set was previously unavailable anywhere. Let's just be happy that you can get some of this information today without having to drive around scanning paper documents.
- colonelxc 10y agoI don't think it is helpful because there is no indication that they tried to pass their 'recommendations' to the people behind this site. It reads like an ad for a competing site.
- dandare 10y agoMy apologies. As a non native speaker I sometimes sound too direct and I was in a hurry typing that comment. I polished some of the edges.
- sgc 10y agoI find it very useful. It is constructive criticism to help a startup in their related field develop further, and includes helpful links to examples. Anyone can see it is an implicit call for any form of cooperation the two organizations might find mutually beneficial; and it ends with a best of luck wish, showing that there is no animosity. We might be "just happy", but both parties here can be happy and keep working at the same time.
- hackuser 10y ago> Let's just be happy that you can get some of this information today ... When else have HN users adopted that approach?: 'Let's just be happy with what we have, and not criticize.' These are constructive, very informative points; in fact, they may be the most informative in this discussion.
- ChuckMcM 10y agoIn the context of public spending data available anywhere, perhaps. As commentary on someone who just took $10M of their own money and created availability of data that didn't exist before? Not as useful. In re-reading both the USAFacts.org page and dandare's comment I really don't see how dandare's criticisms of what data USAFacts made available, what reports they made out of as _demonstrators_ of the data set, and its lack of data outside the US (it is 'USAfacts.org' not 'WorldFacts.org' after all) to be at all helpful or relevant to the USAFacts.org announcement. That said, I would love to see a 'Show HN:' page where the Wikibudgets folks took the USAFacts.org data and added wonderful visualizations and tools to provide additional insights into the data set.