Unfortunately, both of those things frequently happen simultaneously.
4 extra =/= hundreds extra
---
And why did the government spend $8M(!!) in unused solar panels? I could have gotten 26,000+ trash cans at $300 each!
> And why did the government spend $8M(!!) in unused solar panels?
Spares? A lower than expected defect rate? Who knows? Paul doesn't provide useful specifics, just the politically sexy top-level numbers.
In an organization with a multi-trillion dollar annual budget, $8M in unused solar panels is a bit like you throwing away a ream of paper that got some water damage.
> In an organization with a multi-trillion dollar annual budget, $8M in unused solar panels is a bit like you throwing away a ream of paper that got some water damage.
And yet a fraction of that amount is front page HN.
Clearly a lot of other people believe differently.
A lot of people believe incorrect things about stuff they don't understand, yes. HN most certainly isn't immune.
Outrage bait is hardly a new phenomenon. The unit cost looks insane because it's a side effect of the fact that a defense contractor won't get out of bed without a minimum of a couple hundred grand in the contract to cover the program.
Congress. The big stink would go from "we bought four $52k trash cans" to "we bought hundreds of trash cans we won't need for a decade, if ever!"
Examples:
Rand Paul complaining about things like $8M in unused solar panels: https://www.paul.senate.gov/news-sen-rand-paul-highlights-18...
Bobby Jindal saying "Instead of monitoring volcanoes, what Congress should be monitoring is the eruption of spending in Washington, D.C.": https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/news-blog/bobby-jindal-...