With Downgrade, time to remove boondoggle of ObamaCare off the back of the US economy

[Neotrotsky]

With Downgrade, time to remove boondoggle of ObamaCare off the back of the US economy


Indeed,
with the Left mantra of "more tax more tax", they say PapaObama is off the table

Even CBO says PapoObama Care kills jobs

CBO Says ObamaCare Will Kill 800,000 Jobs
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jskjci1ZL9Q]‪800,000 Jobs Gone: CBO Admits Health Care Law Will Kill Jobs‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

Some studies have shown that PapaObama care is having a real impact on
killing jobs NOW

Analysis: Job Growth Was 10-Fold Higher Before the Democrats Passed Obamacare

“Private-sector job creation initially recovered from the recession at a normal rate, leading to predictions last year of a “Recovery Summer.” Since April 2010, however, net private-sector job creation has stalled. Within two months of the passage of Obamacare, the job market stopped improving. This suggests that businesses are not exaggerating when they tell pollsters that the new health care law is holding back hiring.”

Sherk writes that Obamacare “discourages employers from hiring in several ways: ​

 

[Greenbeard]

Even CBO says PapoObama Care kills jobs

No, it doesn't say that. It says that some workers will voluntarily supply less labor because they enjoy greater financial security thanks to the law:

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148) and the Health Care Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-152) will affect some individuals’ decisions about whether and how much to work and employers’ decisions about hiring workers.1 The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the legislation, on net, will reduce the amount of labor used in the economy by a small amount—roughly half a percent—primarily by reducing the amount of labor that workers choose to supply. [...] The expansion of Medicaid and the availability of subsidies through the exchanges will effectively increase beneficiaries’ financial resources. Those additional resources will encourage some people to work fewer hours or to withdraw from the labor market.[...]

Other provisions in the legislation are also likely to diminish people’s incentives to work. Changes to the insurance market, including provisions that prohibit insurers from denying coverage to people because of preexisting conditions and that restrict how much prices can vary with an individual’s age or health status, will increase the appeal of health insurance plans offered outside the workplace for older workers. As a result, some older workers will choose to retire earlier than they otherwise would.​

Given that additional financial security for those hard hit by health costs was an intended consequence of passing the law, this shouldn't come as a shock.

Sherk writes that Obamacare “discourages employers from hiring in several ways:

• Businesses with fewer than 50 workers have a strong incentive to maintain this size, which allows them to avoid the mandate to provide government-approved health coverage or face a penalty;

The vast majority of businesses that make it to and past the 50-employee mark offer health insurance (nationally, >96% of firms with 50 or more employees provide insurance coverage), meaning this disincentive doesn't exist for them. On the margins it will be a factor for those that don't but the magnitude of the effect you're postulating is a bit silly.

• “Businesses with more than 50 workers will see their costs for health coverage rise — they must purchase more expensive government-approved insurance or pay a penalty;

More than half of all folks with private insurance are on self-insured plans; the vast majority of people at large firms are in self-insured plans. Self-insured plans don't need to offer "government-approved insurance," which one assumes refers to the still largely undefined essential benefits package being discussed by the Institute of Medicine right now.

• “Employers face considerable uncertainty about what constitutes qualifying health coverage and what it will cost. They also do not know what the health care market or their health care costs will look like in four years. This makes planning for the future difficult.”

Small businesses can buy insurance through SHOP exchanges being set up in every state. Depending on how the state legislature wants to design it, that exchange for small businesses can operate under an employee choice model (like Utah's existing exchange). That means a defined contribution from the employer with a broad range of plan options for the employee. The employee then pays the difference between the cost of the plan he chooses and his employer's contribution. This is different from current set-ups in which the employer chooses the plan and then faces little shield from rising costs, little ability to shift the decision-making impetus in the face of rising costs to the employee (other than by relying on greater cost-sharing) and, yes, little certainty about future costs.

Greater certainty for employers, greater choice and personal responsibility for employees. Win-win, eh?

 

[Neotrotsky]

Yes voluntary..

left spin

what did Papa Obama say about putting lipstick on a pig



So it is the official position of the Left that Papa Obama will create jobs
and not add to state's burdens

Does the Left believe that anyone will buy that ?

 

[rdean]

Republicans know that tearing things down is way more easy that building something. Notice how all of their policies are designed to ruin something or tear something down? They won't even consider rebuilding the nation's infrastructure which they did nothing for when they held the presidency and both houses. Just wealth redistribution to the top 3% and war. And now they are even worse. Going after the world economy.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Boston Scientific Corp. said yesterday that it plans to eliminate 1,200 to 1,400 jobs worldwide during the next 2 1/2 years to free money for new investments, the Natick medical device maker’s second major round of cuts since last year

 

[Neotrotsky]

Can anyone really trust the Left when it comes to finance?

Obamacare will create 400,000 jobs ALMOST IMMEDIATELY

Where are they- oh wait they must have voluntary moved on from the work force
Indeed, we could even call the high unemployment -proof of the success of PapaObama care




[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNiLYEiFUMU]‪Obamacare will create 400,000 jobs ALMOST IMMEDIATELY, says Choppy Hands McBotox‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Greenbeard]

Yes voluntary..

left spin

Quoting from the actual CBO report that you made a thread to mischaracterize is "spin"?

Let's repeat, again, what the CBO said: "The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the legislation, on net, will reduce the amount of labor used in the economy by a small amount—roughly half a percent—primarily by reducing the amount of labor that workers choose to supply."

Maybe you didn't know that when you started the thread. Now you do. So the question now is: will you continue to distort and lie about what they said?

 

[Neotrotsky]

Republicans know that tearing things down is way more easy that building something. Notice how all of their policies are designed to ruin something or tear something down? They won't even consider rebuilding the nation's infrastructure which they did nothing for when they held the presidency and both houses. Just wealth redistribution to the top 3% and war. And now they are even worse. Going after the world economy.

As opposed to the Left's policies to tear down free markets
and individual rights

 

[Seawytch]

Getting rid of the Affordable Care Act will mean higher deficits (CBO)

 

[Neotrotsky]

Yes voluntary..

left spin

Quoting from the actual CBO report that you made a thread to mischaracterize is "spin"?

Let's repeat, again, what the CBO said: "The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the legislation, on net, will reduce the amount of labor used in the economy by a small amount—roughly half a percent—primarily by reducing the amount of labor that workers choose to supply."

Maybe you didn't know that when you started the thread. Now you do. So the question now is: will you continue to distort and lie about what they said?

The majority of Americans are against it

Just as you choose to ignore from the same report

" In addition, the phaseout of the subsidies as income rises will effectively increase marginal tax rates, which will also discourage work. …"

Funny how that works

With current downgrade, can you really trust the Left when it comes
to finance

 

[Seawytch]

The Price of Repealing the Affordable Care Act

• Critical Consumer Protections Would Be Lost:
• Over 1.2 million young adults would lose their insurance coverage through their parents’ health plans, sometimes just after they finish school and as they are looking for a job. Families across the United States would lose the peace of mind the Affordable Care Act provides by making sure that young adults can stay on their parents plan to age 26 if they do not have coverage of their own.1,2
• Over 165 million residents of the United States with private insurance coverage would suddenly find themselves vulnerable again to having lifetime limits placed on how much insurance companies will spend on their health care.3
• Insurance companies would once again be allowed cut off someone’s coverage unexpectedly when they are in an accident or become sick because of a simple mistake on an application. This would leave 15.9 million people in the United States at risk of losing their insurance at the moment they need it most, as one of the worst abuses of the insurance industry would become legal again.3
• Over 165 million residents of the United States would not know if they are receiving value for their health insurance premium dollars, as insurers in state would no longer be required to spend at least 80 to 85% of premium dollars on health care rather than CEO salaries, bonuses, and corporate profits.3
• New insurance plans would no longer be required to cover recommended preventive services, like mammograms and flu shots, without cost sharing, nor would they have to guarantee enrollees the right to choose any available primary care provider in the network or see an OB-GYN without a referral.
• 44.1 million seniors in the United States who have Medicare coverage would be forced to pay a co-pay to receive important preventive services, like mammograms and colonoscopies.4
• Medicare would no longer pay for an annual check-up visit, so 44.1 million seniors in the United States who have Medicare coverage would have to pay extra if they want to stay healthy by getting check-ups regularly.4
• Over 2.7 million on Medicare Would See Significantly Higher Prescription Drug Costs: In the United States, over 2.7 million Medicare beneficiaries received a one-time, tax-free $250 rebate to help pay for prescription drugs in the “donut hole” coverage gap in 2010. Medicare beneficiaries who fall into the “donut hole” in 2011 will be eligible for 50 percent discounts on covered brand name prescription drugs. Without the law, the burden of high prescription drug costs would hurt millions of Medicare beneficiaries across the country.5
• States Would Not Receive Additional Resources to Crack Down on Unreasonable Insurance Premium Increases: States would not have new resources to review proposed health insurance premium increases and hold insurance companies accountable for unjustified premiums increases.
• States Would Not Receive Additional Funds to Plan for a Health Insurance Exchange: States would not have new resources to build a new, competitive, private health insurance marketplace for consumers that provides lower costs, one-stop insurance shopping, and greater benefits and protections.
• States Would Not Receive Funds to Support a Consumer Assistance Program: States would not have new resources to help protect consumers from some of the worst insurance industry practices.
• 4,748 Employers Would Not Be Receiving Help from the Early Retiree Reinsurance Program: Businesses, schools and other educational institutions, unions, State and local governments, and non-profits would not be receiving much-needed financial relief to help early retirees and their families continue to have quality, affordable health coverage.

 

[Seawytch]

Yes voluntary..

left spin

Quoting from the actual CBO report that you made a thread to mischaracterize is "spin"?

Let's repeat, again, what the CBO said: "The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the legislation, on net, will reduce the amount of labor used in the economy by a small amount—roughly half a percent—primarily by reducing the amount of labor that workers choose to supply."

Maybe you didn't know that when you started the thread. Now you do. So the question now is: will you continue to distort and lie about what they said?

The majority of Americans are against it

Just as you choose to ignore from the same report

" In addition, the phaseout of the subsidies as income rises will effectively increase marginal tax rates, which will also discourage work. …"

Funny how that works

With current downgrade, can you really trust the Left when it comes
to finance

How many of those that are "against" it...feel that way because it didn't go far enough? (You know, like didn't include the Public Option that most Americans wanted)

 

[Greenbeard]

The majority of Americans are against it

A non sequitur generally doesn't help your case.

At a certain point it simply becomes babbling incoherence.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Getting rid of the Affordable Care Act will mean higher deficits (CBO)

don't forget

CBO says, “The projections of the bill’s budgetary impact are quite uncertain" and "have a roughly equal chance of turning out to be too high or too low."


• Medicare’s own independent actuaries have publicly warned that Obamacare’s unrealistic "productivity" cuts to hospitals are very unlikely to happen. Those cuts are projected to “save” $233 billion, while the repeal bill allegedly “costs” $230 billion. Upshot: If the Medicare experts are right on just that one point, repealing Obamacare will have no cost whatsoever.

CBO assumes only 19 million workers will be dumped by their employers into the government exchanges in 2019, when there will be 111 million workers in the pool of potential “dumpees.” Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former CBO director, thinks that’s way too optimistic. He predicts 35 million workers will be dumped. If so, it would add another trillion dollars to the law’s costs.

 

[Neotrotsky]

The majority of Americans are against it

A non sequitur generally doesn't help your case.

At a certain point it simply becomes babbling incoherence.

non sequitur, of course

the will of the people can prove to burdensome at times for those of us on the Left

 

[Neotrotsky]

Again,

after the downgrade can you really trust what the Left says about finances and PapaObama Care



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNiLYEiFUMU]‪Obamacare will create 400,000 jobs ALMOST IMMEDIATELY, says Choppy Hands McBotox‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Salt Jones]

Yes voluntary..

left spin

what did Papa Obama say about putting lipstick on a pig



So it is the official position of the Left that Papa Obama will create jobs
and not add to state's burdens

Does the Left believe that anyone will buy that ?

So, he points out that you are a fucking liar and you blame the left for "spin"? He quoted the same source (CBO) that you cited, you are a disingenuous fuck unworthy of further debate.

 

[Neotrotsky]

The Price of Repealing the Affordable Care Act

What if PapaObama care can not get the 500 billion out of Medicare that it is
using to help pay for it ?

How much we will save then?

PapaObama Care was passed under legislative gimmicks and prepared for CBO scoring with the
same tactics


This is starting to sound like the Left's claims that
640,329 jobs “created or saved” by the Stimulus Bill passed by Congress

 

[Neotrotsky]

Yes voluntary..

left spin

what did Papa Obama say about putting lipstick on a pig



So it is the official position of the Left that Papa Obama will create jobs
and not add to state's burdens

Does the Left believe that anyone will buy that ?

So, he points out that you are a fucking liar and you blame the left for "spin"? He quoted the same source (CBO) that you cited, you are a disingenuous fuck unworthy of further debate.

Well in your mind, but that is not saying much

It only took me one post to know that about
you



don't forget, yeah it is Left spin

CBO says, “The projections of the bill’s budgetary impact are quite uncertain" and "have a roughly equal chance of turning out to be too high or too low."

 

[Mr. Shaman]

With Downgrade, time to remove boondoggle of ObamaCare off the back of the US economy

I'd say it's a little-more appropriate to jettison that Republican-fantasy of....

....Running The Country
Like A Business.

*

It's lookin' like China figures the Republicans have learned....

....as well.

I'd say this is a damned-good-time to vaporize those.....

....BUSH TAX-CUTS.