New CBO report is devastating for Obamacare

[Remodeling Maidiac]

CBO: Health-care law will mean 2 million fewer workers - The Washington Post


Course we've been saying this all along but dems have had their heads permanently stuck in the sand.

 

[Mac1958]

.

NO one can claim to be surprised.

.

 

[SwimExpert]

I don't think anything can destroy Obamacare.

 

[Clementine]

A lot of people have learned the hard way that Obamacare is bad. Many have been warning about this from the start. The costs are ridiculous and less people will be covered. Because many hospitals and doctors won't accept Obamacare patients, less will have access to quality care. Only a liberal would call that success.

So, less people covered, fewer getting quality care and cost up all the way around. And liberals refuse to repeal it. Why?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I don't think anything can destroy Obamacare.

Don't think anything needs to really. It is effectively killing itself.

 

[TemplarKormac]

All of us knew what this bill would do the moment it was passed. Nobody believed us. This just adds to the outrage.

 

[Steven_R]

I don't think anything can destroy Obamacare.

Don't think anything needs to really. It is effectively killing itself.

The key is once Obamacare hits the wall and destroys the private insurance and medical communities in the process, then what? The answer is Congress bringing on Single Payer, you know, because people will demand Congress "do something."

Obamacare was designed to fail and take the medical industry as we knew it with it and set the table for government administered health care.

 

[william the wie]

I don't think the CBO report addresses any of the really major ACA deficits so I am just posting to subscribe.

 

[TemplarKormac]

What I want to know is why Liberals continue to tout this law as something people need? Has it not already been proven to be not so? Why do they insist on foisting this on America?

 

[g5000]

What I want to know is why Liberals continue to tout this law as something people need? Has it not already been proven to be not so? Why do they insist on foisting this on America?

This is what you get when the GOP decided to not do anything about a very real problem when it had the chance to do so. The GOP knew damn well what the Democrats were going to do about health care when given a chance, and the GOP still chose to do nothing.

We were sold down the river into slavery by the GOP. Reap the whirlwind, rubes!

We are now on our way to single payer health care. When ObamaCare flails and fails, the people will cry out for UHC, and they will get it. In our lifetime.

 

[william the wie]

What I want to know is why Liberals continue to tout this law as something people need? Has it not already been proven to be not so? Why do they insist on foisting this on America?

Good question. They will pay for this in both the 2014 and 2016 elections.

 

[Bombur]

Linking health insurance to low end employment is a recipe for disaster. It hasn't been working for a long time now.

 

[rdean]

Oh my Gawd.

This is disasterous.

This is horrible.

I better read about it to see exactly what is being said by the CBO.

The report also reduces CBO's original projection of 7 million people signed up for private health insurance through the state and federal exchanges by the end of 2014 down to 6 million people insured by the end of the year. Medicaid enrollment projections were reduced from 9 million people to 8 million people.

"Over time, more people are expected to respond to the new coverage options, so enrollment is projected to increase sharply in 2015 and 2016," the report said.

the report said decreased hours will be the choice of workers, not employers.

Health law could mean fewer full-time workers, CBO says


— The ACA is cheaper than it expected.
— It will "markedly increase" the number of Americans with health insurance.
— The risk-adjustment provisions, which Congressional Republicans want to overturn as a "bailout" of the insurance industry, will actually turn a profit to the U.S. Treasury.

The CBO projects that the act will reduce the supply of labor, not the availability of jobs. There's a big difference. In fact, it suggests that aggregate demand for labor (that is, the number of jobs) will increase, not decrease; but that many workers or would-be workers will be prompted by the ACA to leave the labor force, many of them voluntarily.
As economist Dean Baker points out, this is, in fact, a beneficial effect of the law, and a sign that it will achieve an important goal. It helps "older workers with serious health conditions who are working now because this is the only way to get health insurance. And (one for the family values crowd) many young mothers who return to work earlier than they would like because they need health insurance. This is a huge plus."

Why the new CBO report on Obamacare is good news

-----------------------

Whew, for a second, I thought these right wingers weren't full of shit. Glad I was wrong.

 

[TemplarKormac]

What I want to know is why Liberals continue to tout this law as something people need? Has it not already been proven to be not so? Why do they insist on foisting this on America?

This is what you get when the GOP decided to not do anything about a very real problem when it had the chance to do so. The GOP knew damn well what the Democrats were going to do about health care when given a chance, and the GOP still chose to do nothing.

We were sold down the river into slavery by the GOP. Reap the whirlwind, rubes!

We are now on our way to single payer health care. When ObamaCare flails and fails, the people will cry out for UHC, and they will get it. In our lifetime.

Are you serious?

The GOP was flatly ignored. Bypassed. Overridden. They had zero power to stop this law. It was the rank partisanship employed by the Democrats that got us in this mess, and now you want to blame this on the GOP? Let's make one thing clear, they didn't pass the law. They couldn't stop the law. They have tried to repeal the law, but Democrats would have nothing of it.

Why are you blaming them? They've introduced numerous alternatives to Obamacare since 2007, g5? This is an absolutely moronic statement from you.

 

[bendog]

Linking health insurance to low end employment is a recipe for disaster. It hasn't been working for a long time now.

Well, if Dean's LA times link turns out to be an accurate prediction, lower paid workers may work fewer hours, but in effect see a pay raise in the form of HC benefits, and thereby have more money to spend on goods and services, which was the intent.

It still seems to me that the dems built a Golden Gate bridge to span a stream, but as G5000 posts, the gop has only itself to blame for not addressing the issue, and instead passing the Medicare drug benefit, cutting taxes for no reason and wandering off into Iraq.

 

[martybegan]

What I want to know is why Liberals continue to tout this law as something people need? Has it not already been proven to be not so? Why do they insist on foisting this on America?

This is what you get when the GOP decided to not do anything about a very real problem when it had the chance to do so. The GOP knew damn well what the Democrats were going to do about health care when given a chance, and the GOP still chose to do nothing.

We were sold down the river into slavery by the GOP. Reap the whirlwind, rubes!

We are now on our way to single payer health care. When ObamaCare flails and fails, the people will cry out for UHC, and they will get it. In our lifetime.

So you are blaming republicans for this somehow?

LOL. Its ALL the Democrats plan, the president's plan.

Its like blaming the people who didn't want to beef up a side-rail along a cliff when the person punching through it was doing 110 mph, drunk, and snorting cocaine off the dashboard.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Linking health insurance to low end employment is a recipe for disaster. It hasn't been working for a long time now.

The CBO disagrees with you.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Linking health insurance to low end employment is a recipe for disaster. It hasn't been working for a long time now.

Well, if Dean's LA times link turns out to be an accurate prediction, lower paid workers may work fewer hours, but in effect see a pay raise in the form of HC benefits, and thereby have more money to spend on goods and services, which was the intent.

Thank you. I was wondering how the Obamabots would try and spin this news to make it sound like this is a good thing.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

What I want to know is why Liberals continue to tout this law as something people need? Has it not already been proven to be not so? Why do they insist on foisting this on America?

This is what you get when the GOP decided to not do anything about a very real problem when it had the chance to do so. The GOP knew damn well what the Democrats were going to do about health care when given a chance, and the GOP still chose to do nothing.

We were sold down the river into slavery by the GOP. Reap the whirlwind, rubes!

We are now on our way to single payer health care. When ObamaCare flails and fails, the people will cry out for UHC, and they will get it. In our lifetime.

Oh puh-leeeeeze...

 

[Truthseeker420]

Now right wingers believe the CBO? I guess we still are up jobs since the CBO projected the Obama stimulus created 3.5 million jobs.