New CBO report is devastating for Obamacare

[oreo]

the original post here is called
"New CBO report is devastating for Obamacare "
the original source was
this
CBO: Health-care law will mean 2 million fewer workers - The Washington Post
it was said by John Boehner that the CBO report says it will cost us Jobs ... he came to the press and said it will cost us jobs... Mitch McConnall came to the press he said it will cost us jobs ... many on these boards are saying it is costing us jobs ...when clearly where you don''t get it DUDE, is you don't have to work full time anymore to get your health care ... that's all its saying ... that's what Ive been saying from the get go ... I said it's not costing jobs but it allows you to work part time or not at all ... where you rocket scientist seem to not get it ... then you start ranting to us about what the CBO report said ...I have a pdf file of the cbo's report ... I know what it says and you question our ability in what it was saying... when you all say it cost us jobs ...when I said no it doesn't... it allows you not to have to work full time or not at all ... how is that so devastating to the country for you not to have to work full time or not at all ...

Poor Billy Boi...you butted into a conversation that was already taking place and unsuccessfully tried to take it over....not happening, like it or not the report admits that the ACA will suppress labor on the lower end of the wage scale, you lose.

no it doesn't it says labor on the lower end of the wages don't have to work in that lower end any more and worry about their health care ...you lose :that's what I've been saying all along

I think this has been all over national news regarding the consequences of the employer mandate. Which of course, was wisely postponed by Democrats until after the mid-term election in November. Yet employers are and have been reacting to it over the last several months. They are preparing themselves.

ObamaCare's impact on jobs is hotly debated by politicians and economists. Critics say the Affordable Care Act gives businesses an incentive to cut workers' hours below the 30-hour-per-week threshold at which the employer mandate to provide health insurance kicks in. White House economists dismiss such evidence as anecdotal, but BLS data show that the workweek in low-wage sectors sank to a record low in July — just before the Obama administration delayed enforcement of the employer mandate until 2015.

In the interest of an informed debate, we've compiled a list of job actions with strong proof that ObamaCare's employer mandate is behind cuts to work hours or staffing levels. As of Jan. 31, our ObamaCare scorecard included 401 employers with more than 100 school districts among them. Recently, IBD explained that a big minimum wage hike alongside the employer mandate would add to pressure on employers to cut workers to part-time, complicating the goal of reducing inequality.

ObamaCare Employer Mandate: A List Of Cuts To Work Hours, Jobs - Investors.com
You can click on the link to see which employers they are referring too.

The list of companies moving to cut hours for part-time workers continues to grow, as employers look to keep staffers below the 30-hour threshold set by the Affordable Care Act.

The Obama administration announced in July that it would delay the so-called employer mandate until 2015. ObamaCare requires that companies with 50 or more employees provide health insurance benefits to every full-time worker, considered to be anyone who logs an average of 30 or more hours a week.

Employers will be hit with a penalty for each full-time employee who isn’t covered and instead purchases insurance through a federally subsidized exchange.

Although the administration delayed implementing the rule until 2015, the penalties for that year will be based on staffing levels recorded in the second half of 2014 at the latest.

As a result, several large companies and a long list of smaller businesses have changed their policies to cap weekly hours at 29.

According to an April survey conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management, 41% of 603 small business owners said they have delayed hiring because of the federal healthcare law. One in five already cut hours, while 20% have reduced payroll.

Mercer, a human resources consulting company, said its own survey found that 12% of all U.S. employers reported plans to reduce workers’ hours as a direct result of the Affordable Care Act. The impact was more pronounced in the retail and hospitality industries, with 20% of employers saying they will cut part-time hours.

Most recently, theme-park operator SeaWorld Entertainment (SEAS) revealed that it reduced its cap on weekly hours for part-timers to 28 from 32. The company does plan to add full-time hourly positions next year across its 11 parks, it said in a statement. Those full-time jobs will include healthcare benefits.

“The move is intended to bring consistency to the part-time designation across the SeaWorld Parks system,” SeaWorld said.

A company spokesperson didn’t comment beyond the statement when asked if the move was also intended to prevent part-time or seasonal employees from being classified as full-time under ObamaCare.

On Wednesday, the Huffington Post website reported that Trader Joe’s, which currently providers healthcare benefits for its part-time workers, sent out a memo to staff detailing the company’s plans to roll back the policy for employees who work less than 30 hours a week.

The California-based grocery chain determined that providing coverage for part-timers who log 18 hours or more will not be worth the cost under ObamaCare, since low-wage workers will be eligible for tax subsidies to buy insurance next year.

Also according to the memo, Trader Joe’s will cut a check for $500 in January to help cover the cost of insurance purchased on the subsidized exchanges.

A spokesperson for Trader Joe’s didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Wal-Mart Stores (WMT) made headlines early in the summer when a Reuters survey revealed the world’s largest retailer was only hiring temporary employees in many of its stores, something it would normally do just during the holiday season.

Walmart said less than 10% of its workforce is temporary, compared to between 1% and 2% before this year. Chief Executive Bill Simon told a group of reporters in June that workers’ hours “flex by the needs of the business from time to time.”

Battling ObamaCare

Other companies have been more forthcoming, whether in public comments or internal directives, when it comes to ObamaCare’s influence in the decision to reduce hours.

Apparel maker Lands’ End has also turned to cutting hours to no more than 29 a week. WKOW in Madison, Wis., reported on a staff memo that notified employees of the change.

In the memo, Lands’ End told its workers, “For some of you, working less hours may be what you wanted. For others, these new governmental guidelines may be very difficult. These guidelines applies (sic) to all companies in the US (unless they have less than 50 employees or are non-profit).”

Lands’ End spokeswoman Michele Casper told FOX Business the company doesn’t comment on internal employee practices.

“We plan to continue to employ part-time employees to best match our workforce to our workload,” Casper added.

Regal Entertainment (RGC) sent out a similar internal memo, according to a report from FOX News. The nation’s largest movie theater chain, which operates more than 500 theaters in 38 states, blamed ObamaCare requirements for capping hours below the 30-hour threshold.

“To comply with the Affordable Care Act, Regal had to increase our health care budget to cover those newly deemed eligible based on the law's definition of a full-time employee,” the company said in its memo. “To manage this budget, all other employees will be scheduled in accord with business needs and in a manner that will not negatively impact our health care budget.”

Regal Entertainment didn’t respond to a request for comment from FOX Business.

New England Motor Freight, a New Jersey-based trucking company, implemented in June an hourly cap for about 400 part-time employees, saying the company can’t afford to offer them health insurance benefits.

Ripple Effect?

Texas Senator Ted Cruz, a Republican, has been one of Washington’s sharpest critics of the Affordable Care Act. He recently remarked that the string of companies cutting hours is evidence of ObamaCare’s negative impact on workers.

He also highlighted congressional testimony from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who told lawmakers that employers are hiring part-time workers to avoid the employer mandate.

“This is one instance in which Bernanke is right,” Cruz said.

Mike Montgomery, a senior economist at IHS Global Insight, said data has yet to show that the average workweek is getting shorter because the incentive structure works in both directions. Fewer hours for part-time workers can be compensated by an increase in hours for employees considered full-time under the law, he explained.

“We are not saying that no one is reducing workweeks, but that some may be raising the average but with fewer workers,” Montgomery added.

There is so far “absolutely no evidence that this is happening,” he said, referring to changes in the average workweek nationwide. But any shortening in the workweek now or in the future may be “invisible in the data since the data only exists to one decimal place and bounces around.”

The private sector isn’t alone in cutting hours for part-time employees, with more than 200 public-sector employers reducing hours to avoid ObamaCare penalties, according to a list compiled by Investor’s Business Daily.

In fact, the effect of ObamaCare thus far appears to be more pronounced in the public sector. Many U.S. towns and counties have joined in and cut part-time hours, and the business newspaper tallied 34 universities and colleges, including college systems, that are doing the same for part-time or adjunct faculty.

With Eye on ObamaCare, Companies Move to Cut Workers? Hours | Fox Business

 

[billyerock1991]

Poor Billy Boi...you butted into a conversation that was already taking place and unsuccessfully tried to take it over....not happening, like it or not the report admits that the ACA will suppress labor on the lower end of the wage scale, you lose.

no it doesn't it says labor on the lower end of the wages don't have to work in that lower end any more and worry about their health care ...you lose :that's what I've been saying all along

Billy, I just have one question for you. If those 2 million leave the workforce who do you suppose will pay their subsidies for healthcare?

thats if your suppose comes to reality ... which in reality we know it won't ... what the cbo was trying to say and conservatives like yourself only catch the clutch phrases ... what they are try to say here is they will no longer have to worry about getting health care ... that's it...

as for who is paying for it ... again you are assuming that these people aren't paying for their health care ... nit always true ....as for who pays in the ACA bill it explains in full detail how they generate capitol for medicaid ... because that's what you're trying to talk about here is medicaid being paid for... do you remember when Boehner was trying to get the tax removed from these medical supply companies and drug companies ... well that's why the dems said no ... you see the majority of the cost to medicaid is pay for by those companies taxes... they are charged 2.2% right off the top ... as for the tax payer paying for it, I doubt it ...

 

[tennisbum]

no it doesn't it says labor on the lower end of the wages don't have to work in that lower end any more and worry about their health care ...you lose :that's what I've been saying all along

Billy, I just have one question for you. If those 2 million leave the workforce who do you suppose will pay their subsidies for healthcare?

thats if your suppose comes to reality ... which in reality we know it won't ... what the cbo was trying to say and conservatives like yourself only catch the clutch phrases ... what they are try to say here is they will no longer have to worry about getting health care ... that's it...

as for who is paying for it ... again you are assuming that these people aren't paying for their health care ... nit always true ....as for who pays in the ACA bill it explains in full detail how they generate capitol for medicaid ... because that's what you're trying to talk about here is medicaid being paid for... do you remember when Boehner was trying to get the tax removed from these medical supply companies and drug companies ... well that's why the dems said no ... you see the majority of the cost to medicaid is pay for by those companies taxes... they are charged 2.2% right off the top ... as for the tax payer paying for it, I doubt it ...

Really? Not according to the CBO report. Something tells me you think you are more informed than the CBO when you make such an asinine statement "which in reality we know it won't"

 

[billyerock1991]

Poor Billy Boi...you butted into a conversation that was already taking place and unsuccessfully tried to take it over....not happening, like it or not the report admits that the ACA will suppress labor on the lower end of the wage scale, you lose.

no it doesn't it says labor on the lower end of the wages don't have to work in that lower end any more and worry about their health care ...you lose :that's what I've been saying all along

I think this has been all over national news regarding the consequences of the employer mandate. Which of course, was wisely postponed by Democrats until after the mid-term election in November. Yet employers are and have been reacting to it over the last several months. They are preparing themselves.

ObamaCare's impact on jobs is hotly debated by politicians and economists. Critics say the Affordable Care Act gives businesses an incentive to cut workers' hours below the 30-hour-per-week threshold at which the employer mandate to provide health insurance kicks in. White House economists dismiss such evidence as anecdotal, but BLS data show that the workweek in low-wage sectors sank to a record low in July — just before the Obama administration delayed enforcement of the employer mandate until 2015.

In the interest of an informed debate, we've compiled a list of job actions with strong proof that ObamaCare's employer mandate is behind cuts to work hours or staffing levels. As of Jan. 31, our ObamaCare scorecard included 401 employers with more than 100 school districts among them. Recently, IBD explained that a big minimum wage hike alongside the employer mandate would add to pressure on employers to cut workers to part-time, complicating the goal of reducing inequality.

ObamaCare Employer Mandate: A List Of Cuts To Work Hours, Jobs - Investors.com
You can click on the link to see which employers they are referring too.

The list of companies moving to cut hours for part-time workers continues to grow, as employers look to keep staffers below the 30-hour threshold set by the Affordable Care Act.

The Obama administration announced in July that it would delay the so-called employer mandate until 2015. ObamaCare requires that companies with 50 or more employees provide health insurance benefits to every full-time worker, considered to be anyone who logs an average of 30 or more hours a week.

Employers will be hit with a penalty for each full-time employee who isn’t covered and instead purchases insurance through a federally subsidized exchange.

Although the administration delayed implementing the rule until 2015, the penalties for that year will be based on staffing levels recorded in the second half of 2014 at the latest.

As a result, several large companies and a long list of smaller businesses have changed their policies to cap weekly hours at 29.

According to an April survey conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management, 41% of 603 small business owners said they have delayed hiring because of the federal healthcare law. One in five already cut hours, while 20% have reduced payroll.

Mercer, a human resources consulting company, said its own survey found that 12% of all U.S. employers reported plans to reduce workers’ hours as a direct result of the Affordable Care Act. The impact was more pronounced in the retail and hospitality industries, with 20% of employers saying they will cut part-time hours.

Most recently, theme-park operator SeaWorld Entertainment (SEAS) revealed that it reduced its cap on weekly hours for part-timers to 28 from 32. The company does plan to add full-time hourly positions next year across its 11 parks, it said in a statement. Those full-time jobs will include healthcare benefits.

“The move is intended to bring consistency to the part-time designation across the SeaWorld Parks system,” SeaWorld said.

A company spokesperson didn’t comment beyond the statement when asked if the move was also intended to prevent part-time or seasonal employees from being classified as full-time under ObamaCare.

On Wednesday, the Huffington Post website reported that Trader Joe’s, which currently providers healthcare benefits for its part-time workers, sent out a memo to staff detailing the company’s plans to roll back the policy for employees who work less than 30 hours a week.

The California-based grocery chain determined that providing coverage for part-timers who log 18 hours or more will not be worth the cost under ObamaCare, since low-wage workers will be eligible for tax subsidies to buy insurance next year.

Also according to the memo, Trader Joe’s will cut a check for $500 in January to help cover the cost of insurance purchased on the subsidized exchanges.

A spokesperson for Trader Joe’s didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Wal-Mart Stores (WMT) made headlines early in the summer when a Reuters survey revealed the world’s largest retailer was only hiring temporary employees in many of its stores, something it would normally do just during the holiday season.

Walmart said less than 10% of its workforce is temporary, compared to between 1% and 2% before this year. Chief Executive Bill Simon told a group of reporters in June that workers’ hours “flex by the needs of the business from time to time.”

Battling ObamaCare

Other companies have been more forthcoming, whether in public comments or internal directives, when it comes to ObamaCare’s influence in the decision to reduce hours.

Apparel maker Lands’ End has also turned to cutting hours to no more than 29 a week. WKOW in Madison, Wis., reported on a staff memo that notified employees of the change.

In the memo, Lands’ End told its workers, “For some of you, working less hours may be what you wanted. For others, these new governmental guidelines may be very difficult. These guidelines applies (sic) to all companies in the US (unless they have less than 50 employees or are non-profit).”

Lands’ End spokeswoman Michele Casper told FOX Business the company doesn’t comment on internal employee practices.

“We plan to continue to employ part-time employees to best match our workforce to our workload,” Casper added.

Regal Entertainment (RGC) sent out a similar internal memo, according to a report from FOX News. The nation’s largest movie theater chain, which operates more than 500 theaters in 38 states, blamed ObamaCare requirements for capping hours below the 30-hour threshold.

“To comply with the Affordable Care Act, Regal had to increase our health care budget to cover those newly deemed eligible based on the law's definition of a full-time employee,” the company said in its memo. “To manage this budget, all other employees will be scheduled in accord with business needs and in a manner that will not negatively impact our health care budget.”

Regal Entertainment didn’t respond to a request for comment from FOX Business.

New England Motor Freight, a New Jersey-based trucking company, implemented in June an hourly cap for about 400 part-time employees, saying the company can’t afford to offer them health insurance benefits.

Ripple Effect?

Texas Senator Ted Cruz, a Republican, has been one of Washington’s sharpest critics of the Affordable Care Act. He recently remarked that the string of companies cutting hours is evidence of ObamaCare’s negative impact on workers.

He also highlighted congressional testimony from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who told lawmakers that employers are hiring part-time workers to avoid the employer mandate.

“This is one instance in which Bernanke is right,” Cruz said.

Mike Montgomery, a senior economist at IHS Global Insight, said data has yet to show that the average workweek is getting shorter because the incentive structure works in both directions. Fewer hours for part-time workers can be compensated by an increase in hours for employees considered full-time under the law, he explained.

“We are not saying that no one is reducing workweeks, but that some may be raising the average but with fewer workers,” Montgomery added.

There is so far “absolutely no evidence that this is happening,” he said, referring to changes in the average workweek nationwide. But any shortening in the workweek now or in the future may be “invisible in the data since the data only exists to one decimal place and bounces around.”

The private sector isn’t alone in cutting hours for part-time employees, with more than 200 public-sector employers reducing hours to avoid ObamaCare penalties, according to a list compiled by Investor’s Business Daily.

In fact, the effect of ObamaCare thus far appears to be more pronounced in the public sector. Many U.S. towns and counties have joined in and cut part-time hours, and the business newspaper tallied 34 universities and colleges, including college systems, that are doing the same for part-time or adjunct faculty.

With Eye on ObamaCare, Companies Move to Cut Workers? Hours | Fox Business

come back when you have a credible source ... FOX NOISE WILL NEVER never be a credible source for any information at all ... you can posy all of the lies you want from FOX NOISE I won't waste my time to prove to you how wrong they are ... its a waste ... try again ... Jesus when are you nut jobs going to learn ... NOBODY ACCEPTS FOX NOISE AS A SOURCE ... ACCEPT RIGHT WING NUT JOBS ...

 

[billyerock1991]

Here' what its all about ... Republicans don't like mandates unless it benefits themselves ... Its that plain its that simple... Republicans don't like the idea that you are no longer forced to have to work, so now you can get health care ... They hate the idea that a person can stay home and get health care and they don't have to work for it ... So do we dems we have to work too to pay for them you're not the only ones who work... But you don't see us whining about the few that don't work... Over the many who do... Now we don't have to worry about health care ... Weather they have a job or they just lost it ... Republicans don't like the idea that a person who just lost their job and sits home get unemployment and their health care ... This pisses them off beyound belief ... I say tuff deal with it

 

[oreo]

no it doesn't it says labor on the lower end of the wages don't have to work in that lower end any more and worry about their health care ...you lose :that's what I've been saying all along

I think this has been all over national news regarding the consequences of the employer mandate. Which of course, was wisely postponed by Democrats until after the mid-term election in November. Yet employers are and have been reacting to it over the last several months. They are preparing themselves.


ObamaCare Employer Mandate: A List Of Cuts To Work Hours, Jobs - Investors.com
You can click on the link to see which employers they are referring too.

The list of companies moving to cut hours for part-time workers continues to grow, as employers look to keep staffers below the 30-hour threshold set by the Affordable Care Act.

The Obama administration announced in July that it would delay the so-called employer mandate until 2015. ObamaCare requires that companies with 50 or more employees provide health insurance benefits to every full-time worker, considered to be anyone who logs an average of 30 or more hours a week.

Employers will be hit with a penalty for each full-time employee who isn’t covered and instead purchases insurance through a federally subsidized exchange.

Although the administration delayed implementing the rule until 2015, the penalties for that year will be based on staffing levels recorded in the second half of 2014 at the latest.

As a result, several large companies and a long list of smaller businesses have changed their policies to cap weekly hours at 29.

According to an April survey conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management, 41% of 603 small business owners said they have delayed hiring because of the federal healthcare law. One in five already cut hours, while 20% have reduced payroll.

Mercer, a human resources consulting company, said its own survey found that 12% of all U.S. employers reported plans to reduce workers’ hours as a direct result of the Affordable Care Act. The impact was more pronounced in the retail and hospitality industries, with 20% of employers saying they will cut part-time hours.

Most recently, theme-park operator SeaWorld Entertainment (SEAS) revealed that it reduced its cap on weekly hours for part-timers to 28 from 32. The company does plan to add full-time hourly positions next year across its 11 parks, it said in a statement. Those full-time jobs will include healthcare benefits.

“The move is intended to bring consistency to the part-time designation across the SeaWorld Parks system,” SeaWorld said.

A company spokesperson didn’t comment beyond the statement when asked if the move was also intended to prevent part-time or seasonal employees from being classified as full-time under ObamaCare.

On Wednesday, the Huffington Post website reported that Trader Joe’s, which currently providers healthcare benefits for its part-time workers, sent out a memo to staff detailing the company’s plans to roll back the policy for employees who work less than 30 hours a week.

The California-based grocery chain determined that providing coverage for part-timers who log 18 hours or more will not be worth the cost under ObamaCare, since low-wage workers will be eligible for tax subsidies to buy insurance next year.

Also according to the memo, Trader Joe’s will cut a check for $500 in January to help cover the cost of insurance purchased on the subsidized exchanges.

A spokesperson for Trader Joe’s didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Wal-Mart Stores (WMT) made headlines early in the summer when a Reuters survey revealed the world’s largest retailer was only hiring temporary employees in many of its stores, something it would normally do just during the holiday season.

Walmart said less than 10% of its workforce is temporary, compared to between 1% and 2% before this year. Chief Executive Bill Simon told a group of reporters in June that workers’ hours “flex by the needs of the business from time to time.”

Battling ObamaCare

Other companies have been more forthcoming, whether in public comments or internal directives, when it comes to ObamaCare’s influence in the decision to reduce hours.

Apparel maker Lands’ End has also turned to cutting hours to no more than 29 a week. WKOW in Madison, Wis., reported on a staff memo that notified employees of the change.

In the memo, Lands’ End told its workers, “For some of you, working less hours may be what you wanted. For others, these new governmental guidelines may be very difficult. These guidelines applies (sic) to all companies in the US (unless they have less than 50 employees or are non-profit).”

Lands’ End spokeswoman Michele Casper told FOX Business the company doesn’t comment on internal employee practices.

“We plan to continue to employ part-time employees to best match our workforce to our workload,” Casper added.

Regal Entertainment (RGC) sent out a similar internal memo, according to a report from FOX News. The nation’s largest movie theater chain, which operates more than 500 theaters in 38 states, blamed ObamaCare requirements for capping hours below the 30-hour threshold.

“To comply with the Affordable Care Act, Regal had to increase our health care budget to cover those newly deemed eligible based on the law's definition of a full-time employee,” the company said in its memo. “To manage this budget, all other employees will be scheduled in accord with business needs and in a manner that will not negatively impact our health care budget.”

Regal Entertainment didn’t respond to a request for comment from FOX Business.

New England Motor Freight, a New Jersey-based trucking company, implemented in June an hourly cap for about 400 part-time employees, saying the company can’t afford to offer them health insurance benefits.

Ripple Effect?

Texas Senator Ted Cruz, a Republican, has been one of Washington’s sharpest critics of the Affordable Care Act. He recently remarked that the string of companies cutting hours is evidence of ObamaCare’s negative impact on workers.

He also highlighted congressional testimony from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who told lawmakers that employers are hiring part-time workers to avoid the employer mandate.

“This is one instance in which Bernanke is right,” Cruz said.

Mike Montgomery, a senior economist at IHS Global Insight, said data has yet to show that the average workweek is getting shorter because the incentive structure works in both directions. Fewer hours for part-time workers can be compensated by an increase in hours for employees considered full-time under the law, he explained.

“We are not saying that no one is reducing workweeks, but that some may be raising the average but with fewer workers,” Montgomery added.

There is so far “absolutely no evidence that this is happening,” he said, referring to changes in the average workweek nationwide. But any shortening in the workweek now or in the future may be “invisible in the data since the data only exists to one decimal place and bounces around.”

The private sector isn’t alone in cutting hours for part-time employees, with more than 200 public-sector employers reducing hours to avoid ObamaCare penalties, according to a list compiled by Investor’s Business Daily.

In fact, the effect of ObamaCare thus far appears to be more pronounced in the public sector. Many U.S. towns and counties have joined in and cut part-time hours, and the business newspaper tallied 34 universities and colleges, including college systems, that are doing the same for part-time or adjunct faculty.

With Eye on ObamaCare, Companies Move to Cut Workers? Hours | Fox Business

come back when you have a credible source ... FOX NOISE WILL NEVER never be a credible source for any information at all ... you can posy all of the lies you want from FOX NOISE I won't waste my time to prove to you how wrong they are ... its a waste ... try again ... Jesus when are you nut jobs going to learn ... NOBODY ACCEPTS FOX NOISE AS A SOURCE ... ACCEPT RIGHT WING NUT JOBS ...

Investors daily--also remarked--which you want to ignore also. Look it's as plain as the nose on your face. Employers with more than 50 employees are cutting their full time workers to part-time--working no more than 29 hours per week to get out of paying for their Obamacare insurance.

There will be NO full time workers at McDonald's--Walmart--and many other large corporations. The list is growing daily.

Now what exactly does this do to the worker? They are bringing home less take home pay because they're now part-time and they are getting kicked on to the exchanges as they are mandated to purchase their own insurance--otherwise they face a penalty.

Second phase--MEANING that there is less expendable cash in their pockets--going into the Third phase--they can't run to the mall to purchase goods--Fourth phase--meaning that since less cash is going into the mall--STORE owners will start laying off employees--meaning we end up in another severe recession and it's all because of Obamacare.

It's really not Rocket Science it's just how our economy works.

Welcome to your hope and change!

 

[tennisbum]

Here' what its all about ... Republicans don't like mandates unless it benefits themselves ... Its that plain its that simple... Republicans don't like the idea that you are no longer forced to have to work, so now you can get health care ... They hate the idea that a person can stay home and get health care and they don't have to work for it ... So do we dems we have to work too to pay for them you're not the only ones who work... But you don't see us whining about the few that don't work... Over the many who do... Now we don't have to worry about health care ... Weather they have a job or they just lost it ... Republicans don't like the idea that a person who just lost their job and sits home get unemployment and their health care ... This pisses them off beyound belief ... I say tuff deal with it

 

[Antares]

O.K. LoneLaughter--I have given you a lot of time to basically answer a simple question regarding employer liabilities other than wages. You are either furiously trying to look up the answer to a very basic question and will post later after you find out what they are--or your best option at this time is to avoid it--because after you get through with the answer to that question, you can bet there will be more.

I really don't mind debating people who speak their minds on topics. What irritates me is people, like you, who try to sway opinions by misrepresenting themselves and or their background and experience and that's exactly what you have done.

You have absolutely no idea what it's like to own a business much less how hard to keep it open once it's started. Obamacare is a WMD bomb to employers in this country--who are right now struggling to keep their business's open.

At any rate you have learned well from your Master and Chief--Barack Obama--our community organizer President on how to misrepresent his bills and himself.

LL is simply a poser who must protect King Barak at all costs. He'll just deflect, dodge, and generally pretend he /she is the smartest it in the room.

I find I learn a lot less when that is the case. Now for Ss & Gs let me try a shot at your goal.

The CBO made no major noises about subsidy recapture tax rates when people try to better themselves and what little data I have been able to dig up indicates that is a gigantic hurdle to reentering the work force.

Also net diversion of consumption to medical/health services appears to be much higher than expected.

The effects of medical services migration also tend to be understated. MediCal seems likely to be the first break but IL, NY, MA and MD are all going to see a, perhaps critical, decline in licensed physicians per 100,000 population while other states will have more than can be usefully employed.

Do you also find it suspicious that these bigger issues were not addressed in the report?

I do, but I would chalk that up to not enough time for real data to be generated yet.
Lot's to be played out yet.

 

[Antares]

the original post here is called
"New CBO report is devastating for Obamacare "
the original source was
this
CBO: Health-care law will mean 2 million fewer workers - The Washington Post
it was said by John Boehner that the CBO report says it will cost us Jobs ... he came to the press and said it will cost us jobs... Mitch McConnall came to the press he said it will cost us jobs ... many on these boards are saying it is costing us jobs ...when clearly where you don''t get it DUDE, is you don't have to work full time anymore to get your health care ... that's all its saying ... that's what Ive been saying from the get go ... I said it's not costing jobs but it allows you to work part time or not at all ... where you rocket scientist seem to not get it ... then you start ranting to us about what the CBO report said ...I have a pdf file of the cbo's report ... I know what it says and you question our ability in what it was saying... when you all say it cost us jobs ...when I said no it doesn't... it allows you not to have to work full time or not at all ... how is that so devastating to the country for you not to have to work full time or not at all ...

Poor Billy Boi...you butted into a conversation that was already taking place and unsuccessfully tried to take it over....not happening, like it or not the report admits that the ACA will suppress labor on the lower end of the wage scale, you lose.

no it doesn't it says labor on the lower end of the wages don't have to work in that lower end any more and worry about their health care ...you lose :that's what I've been saying all along

LOL, poor Billy.

no it doesn't it says labor on the lower end of the wages don't have to work in that lower end any more and worry about their health care ...you lose :that's what I've been saying all along

Uh...Billy?
Let me get this straight....

People ALREADY not making very much choose to work less (and make less) is a good thing?

That your point?

 

[Antares]

Let's keep it in perspective Billy Boi....

For example, some provisions will raise effective
tax rates on earnings from labor and thus will reduce the
amount of labor that some workers choose to supply

It is ascribing the "choice" to being the dodging of taxes.....not to mention this....you are saying they will choose to work less BECAUSE they have Health Insurance that;

A) They Didn't have prior to the Law

and.....

B) That they aren't paying for now....you go ahead and run with that.

 

[Antares]

Further....

The ACA also will exert conflicting
pressures on the quantity of labor that employers
demand, primarily during the next few years

But you are claiming this isn't true, why did they include it in the report?

 

[Antares]

Because the largest declines in labor
supply will probably occur among lower-wage workers,
the reduction in aggregate compensation (wages, salaries,
and fringe benefits) and the impact on the overall economy
will be proportionally smaller than the reduction in
hours worked.

ok....

Specifically, CBO estimates that the ACA
will cause a reduction of roughly 1 percent in aggregate
labor compensation over the 2017–2024 period, compared
with what it would have been otherwise

It's "good" because the adverse effects are smaller because they will ONLY effect the "low wage" earners...um, ok.

 

[oreo]

Poor Billy Boi...you butted into a conversation that was already taking place and unsuccessfully tried to take it over....not happening, like it or not the report admits that the ACA will suppress labor on the lower end of the wage scale, you lose.

no it doesn't it says labor on the lower end of the wages don't have to work in that lower end any more and worry about their health care ...you lose :that's what I've been saying all along

LOL, poor Billy.

no it doesn't it says labor on the lower end of the wages don't have to work in that lower end any more and worry about their health care ...you lose :that's what I've been saying all along

Uh...Billy?
Let me get this straight....

People ALREADY not making very much choose to work less (and make less) is a good thing?

That your point?

To add: This is what our Federal Reserve Chairman stated--Ben Bernanke:

He also highlighted congressional testimony from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who told lawmakers that employers are hiring part-time workers to avoid the employer mandate.

With Eye on ObamaCare, Companies Move to Cut Workers? Hours | Fox Business

Target and Home Depot announced last week--that they were sending their part time employees onto the exchanges to purchase their own insurance.
Target to Drop Health Insurance for Part-Time Workers - Bloomberg
Home Depot Sending 20,000 Part-Timers to Health Exchanges - Bloomberg

But to a die hard liberal it's not happening because OBAMA didn't tell them that. They remind of Bagdad Bob--lol.

 

[Antares]

The reduction in CBO’s projections of hours worked
represents a decline in the number of full-time-equivalent
workers of about 2.0 million in 2017, rising to about
2.5 million in 2024.

But you said this wasn't happening....?

 

[Antares]

The decline in fulltime-
equivalent employment stemming from the ACA
will consist of some people not being employed at all and
other people working fewer hours;

LOL...Billy????

The unemployed and the low wage earners are baring the brunt of the loss..CLEARLY good news. the brunt

 

[Meister]

Y'all be hatin.

Ima on Medicaid, and I been on it since 2000.

Your point?

 

[william the wie]

The decline in fulltime-
equivalent employment stemming from the ACA
will consist of some people not being employed at all and
other people working fewer hours;

LOL...Billy????

The unemployed and the low wage earners are baring the brunt of the loss..CLEARLY good news. the brunt

Unfair, This argument requires elementary school numaracy and as Barbie taught us, "Math is hard."

 

[MeBelle]

i am not spinning anything. i reviewed your uninformed at best and malignant at worst input to this thread, and then i spanked your partisan clueless ass.

you not negging me proves nothing of relevance. sort of like your other input.

Denial is a river in Egypt.

You negged me rather then discuss.
The neg in itself proves your defensiveness.

Must see a few patients now.
Argue with you later, tater.

sure thing. bye bye, and thanks for flailing.

You're the best teacher ever!

 

[MeBelle]

the original post here is called
"New CBO report is devastating for Obamacare "
the original source was
this
CBO: Health-care law will mean 2 million fewer workers - The Washington Post

While true, the second paragraph in the WaPo linked to the CBO report.

 

[MeBelle]

fwiw there are two (2) tyler durden's.

I'm not sure what you mean by that, but at Zero Hedge, its the non de plume of any male writer on the site. At one time, there were over 30 writers using the Tyler Durden handle.

Zero Hedge has some good stuff, but mostly, it sells shrill financial apocalyptic hysteria.

I was referring to this:

Tyler Durden - Fight Club Wiki