3 ms·
This does not seem to be a fair assessment. The "life-altering value" is not provided by the cost of the IT project, but by the total cost of healthcare in the
by waps 12y ago
This does not seem to be a fair assessment. The "life-altering value" is not provided by the cost of the IT project, but by the total cost of healthcare in the US.
That's 3.8 trillion dollars, or 11900 USD per person per year (first figure divided by 300 million). Wikipedia lists the per capita expenditure as 8500 USD per person per year for 2011, not sure why there is such a large discrepancy.
Total amount of people on healthcare in the US is listed as 11.7 million jobs.
- colmmacc 12y agoAnother reason I find the comparison to twitter interesting is that both Healthcare.gov and Twitter have no intrinsic value; their innovation and value is that they facilitate and mediate in ways that couldn't have gone before. The real value is provided by the parties with whom the connection is made; healthcare professionals and medicines in the case of h.g, other users and communicators in the case of t.c. Something else I should have mentioned before; it is also very tempting to look at the outward functionality of something and not see the mistaken paths that led to nowhere, the research and measurements and experimentation it took to arrive at a working destination. That's another area where I'd guess the two sites have costs.