New CBO report is devastating for Obamacare

[billyerock1991]

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?

nobodys claiming it isn't true ... what they are saying is now they don't have to accept the demands of a employer who says to you, its my way or the highway ... when bill clinton was in office, I remember employers were doing every thing the could to keep you ... then after the republicans got into power and fucked everything up, it was back to the ole my way or the highway mentality of the employer ... now the employee can say "lets take to the highway" and go to a different job ... when it comes available... where these my way or the highway owners deserve what the get with their
arrogants ... incompetent workers ... where you republicans can't stand the Idea that the American worker don't have to worry about losing their health care when quitting ... that Idea just kills you republicans ... because you can no longer hold their lives in your hands ...

 

[billyerock1991]

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

yeah thats what they were referring to the fight clib ... you do say the stupidest shit ... they were referring to the writer and you know it ... your attempt here to make them look foolish ... once again you've shown us your inability to debate... just spin spin spin ... the writer is a right wing nut job whose whole life intention is mislead the people when it comes to conservative thinking ... so riiiiiiight we pick the fighter... right the guy that gets their brains knocked around on a weekly bases ... idiot!!!!

 

[billyerock1991]

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....?

no I didn't stop putting words into my mouth ..I clearly said where does it say jobs will be lost because of the ACA thats it ... thats what Ive said ...all you posted is one section of the CBO report that you don't like the Idea of it ... if these companies don't like the idea of the employee saying to them sorry buddy, I need more money, or I want to work part time, or I'm just sick and tired of your bull shit, they can ... that's what it's all about here ... you as a employee saying to your employer, you don't care what you want employer, if I don't like what your doing to me I quit ... then go to the next employer... sooner or later these arrogant employers will get it ... if they want their company to run smooth then listen to the will your worker instead of demanding ... and you republicans don't like this idea ...you republicans don't like the Idea you can no longer hold the power over a employees head ... that's thought its killing you ... to think a employee of yours can say shove it buddy, I'll take the highway and not have to worry about their health care ... one less stress on the american worker

 

[billyerock1991]

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.

you know I've never seen where a part time worker got health care in any company ... I'm not saying they don't ... I'm just saying I'm not aware of any my wife who works as a human resource consultant for many companies said to me, that she's not aware of any company that pays their part time workers their health care ... but their might be some, so your point is what here ???

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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?

nobodys claiming it isn't true ... what they are saying is now they don't have to accept the demands of a employer who says to you, its my way or the highway ... when bill clinton was in office, I remember employers were doing every thing the could to keep you ... then after the republicans got into power and fucked everything up, it was back to the ole my way or the highway mentality of the employer ... now the employee can say "lets take to the highway" and go to a different job ... when it comes available... where these my way or the highway owners deserve what the get with their
arrogants ... incompetent workers ... where you republicans can't stand the Idea that the American worker don't have to worry about losing their health care when quitting ... that Idea just kills you republicans ... because you can no longer hold their lives in your hands ...

In other words, they have the exact same options now they did 5 years ago.

 

[oreo]

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.

you know I've never seen where a part time worker got health care in any company ... I'm not saying they don't ... I'm just saying I'm not aware of any my wife who works as a human resource consultant for many companies said to me, that she's not aware of any company that pays their part time workers their health care ... but their might be some, so your point is what here ???

Well if you read the Target link (above)-they had a medical insurance plan for part time workers that hardly anyone participated in--so they have decided to eliminate that--so that their part time employees will be forced to go onto the exchanges to purchase their own health care. If they don't they face a penalty.

Yes there are plenty of corporations that do offer their part time employees the option of participating in a company sponsored medical insurance plan.

The point being made here--is that there are companies that are hiring only part time workers to avoid the cost of Obamacare--and there are also companies that are cutting back the hours of full time employees to no more than 29 hours a week to avoid the cost of Obamacare. IOW--it's much cheaper for corporations/small business owners etc. to turn all of their full time employees into no more than 29 hour a week part time employees than to pay for their medical insurance as mandated under Obamacare.

Now for those people who work for small business (less than 50 employees) that already have a sponsored employer based medical coverage plan. These people are experiencing this.



Again--it's not IF Obamacare will affect you it's WHEN.

 

[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....?

no I didn't stop putting words into my mouth ..I clearly said where does it say jobs will be lost because of the ACA thats it ... thats what Ive said ...all you posted is one section of the CBO report that you don't like the Idea of it ... if these companies don't like the idea of the employee saying to them sorry buddy, I need more money, or I want to work part time, or I'm just sick and tired of your bull shit, they can ... that's what it's all about here ... you as a employee saying to your employer, you don't care what you want employer, if I don't like what your doing to me I quit ... then go to the next employer... sooner or later these arrogant employers will get it ... if they want their company to run smooth then listen to the will your worker instead of demanding ... and you republicans don't like this idea ...you republicans don't like the Idea you can no longer hold the power over a employees head ... that's thought its killing you ... to think a employee of yours can say shove it buddy, I'll take the highway and not have to worry about their health care ... one less stress on the american worker

yet in all of your attempts here trying to spin your post, it doesn't say it will cause jobs to be lost now does it ... it says "them not being employed" ... it doesn't say there's no jobs available for them , now does it .... iy says them not being employed...



Parse this.....

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

Now...."The decline in full time employment"......and "consist of some people not working"....

Did you want to make the case the context of those two phrases used together DOESN'T mean that jobs will be lost?

I feel sorry for you...it must be hard to live with a simple brain unable to understand what you are actually reading....

(smile) Poor Billy.....deflect run, parse....

 

[Mac1958]

Moved....

 

[hortysir]

2 days and 8 pages of posts and all we have is right wing spin.

While you provide nothing to the discussion except a piece of shit Sean Penn.

And, BTW, as much as I like the sentiment of your signature area......Baseball has been infiltrated by the Japanese, nobody knows the origin of a hot dog anymore, apple pies are in the freezer aisle after the apples are picked by illegal immigrants and packed who-knows-where, and Chevrolets are now made in China

 

[LoneLaugher]

Have any nutters come to this thread to issue a retraction yet? Integrity, anyone?

 

[Antares]

Have any nutters come to this thread to issue a retraction yet? Integrity, anyone?

You've been ***** slapped up one side and down the other.

Run along and jerk off over Hillary's picture.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Have any nutters come to this thread to issue a retraction yet? Integrity, anyone?

You've been ***** slapped up one side and down the other.

Run along and jerk off over Hillary's picture.

Funny.......I didn't feel a thing.

How many jobs did the CBO say would be lost, again?

 

[Antares]

Have any nutters come to this thread to issue a retraction yet? Integrity, anyone?

You've been ***** slapped up one side and down the other.

Run along and jerk off over Hillary's picture.

Funny.......I didn't feel a thing.

How many jobs did the CBO say would be lost, again?

I invite you to take the CBO Report and use it to disprove one point I made with it...

Of course your problem will be that I only used THEIR words to make their points....

You lose he/she/it.

 

[oreo]

Have any nutters come to this thread to issue a retraction yet? Integrity, anyone?

You've been ***** slapped up one side and down the other.

Run along and jerk off over Hillary's picture.

Funny.......I didn't feel a thing.

How many jobs did the CBO say would be lost, again?

Your health care--Dictator and Chief just postponed the employer MANDATE again--now until 2016? I believe they have FINALLY realized just how devastating to the economy--in lost jobs and full time workers becoming part time workers overnight--should the law be enforced.
White House delays health insurance mandate for medium-size employers until 2016 - The Washington Post


And of course again--Obama usurped his constitutional authority to do it.

Generally speaking, you get past the next election by changing your policies, by announcing new initiatives, but not by wantonly changing the law, lawlessly. I mean, this is stuff that you do in a banana republic. It’s as if the law is simply a blackboard on which Obama writes any number he wants, any delay he wants and any provision. It’s now reached a point where it is so endemic that nobody even notices or complains. I think if the complaints had started with the first arbitrary changes, and these are are not adjustments or transitions. These are political decisions to minimize the impact leading up to an election, and it’s changing the law in a way that you are not allowed to do. … It’s not incompetence. Willful breaking of the constitutional order — where in the Constitution is the president allowed to alter a law 27 times after it’s been passed?

Krauthammer: These ObamaCare changes are getting so endemic, ?nobody even complains? anymore « Hot Air

Welcome to your hope and change!

 

[itfitzme]

I gotta wonder if anyone gets that the effect of ACA is a benefit to individuals in the labor force.

With some percentage deciding to work fewer hours, supply of labor is less than it would otherwise be.

Demand for labor is expected to continue to be higher than would otherwise be expected as GDP continues to trend towards potential GDP.

The combination of reduced supply and increased demand has a net positive effect. This means that individuals participating in the labor force will find jobs more readily.

 

[emilynghiem]

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.

Dear Steve: As such, what the Republicans and Christian Right can offer in response
is IF ALL taxpayers have to pay for ALL health care for ALL people, then petition to
INCLUDE AS A CONDITION FOR UNIVERSAL COVERAGE
THAT ALL PEOPLE GO THROUGH SPIRITUAL HEALING
to reduce or remove the causes of cancer, criminal illness, unnatural homosexuality
caused by abuse, pedophilia, drug addictions, cutting self-harm or eating disorders, etc.

So either invest money into proving this works medically for all people of all faiths
so it is not religiously imposed or discriminating.

or if people do not agree to these terms, then divide the programs by party.

And people who believe in covering their members FREELY and VOLUNTARILY
by spiritual healing and charitable health care not forced by govt, can go with one system.

And people who want to go with federal mandates, but want drug abuse
and abortion and free choice to pay for these consequences, can fund another system.

So give them want they want.
And if they dont like the conditions it takes to cover all people, they will agree to separate.

 

[emilynghiem]

I gotta wonder if anyone gets that the effect of ACA is a benefit to individuals in the labor force.

With some percentage deciding to work fewer hours, supply of labor is less than it would otherwise be.

Demand for labor is expected to continue to be higher than would otherwise be expected as GDP continues to trend towards potential GDP.

The combination of reduced supply and increased demand has a net positive effect. This means that individuals participating in the labor force will find jobs more readily.

Dear itfitzme:
don't forget the human factor of free will and consent.
If people don't consent to work to pay for a program or a solution,
no matter how well it works, if they do not agree voluntarily
it is involuntary servitude.

I pointed out before, that spiritual healing is free effective and would cut the costs of
crime and medical care so much that more people could be saved and served.

But this must be freely chosen or it does not work. Spiritual healing is based on forgiveness therapy to heal the mind and spirit in order to heal the body and relations with others.
it can never be forced. All the recovery programs from AA to demonic deliverance to overcome addiction and severe ills are all based on FREE participation and chioce to change. or these systems do not work and the people remain sick and stuck.

So even with this GREAT solution, it CANNOT be mandated by government.
So neither can insurance or any other solution that is GREAT and would help people.
Spiritual healing works even better and it is free and cures disease while insurance does not. So if it cannot be mandated as a requirement, how can insurance be?

As for involuntary servitude, look at the taxdollars and labor of Americans that goes into public costs to pay for crimes and also health care/ER hospitalization caused by criminals.

If our laws do not make the convicted criminals pay and work for their own costs they incurred themselves by lawless behavior

what makes you think lawabiding citizens who committed no crimes deserve or agree to pay these costs for them?

Why mandate that a certain tax on income from labor from "people who commit no crimes"
should pay for cost INCURRED BY PEOPLE WHO DO.

Don't you think that is backwards. Shouldn't the govt be in charge of enforcing laws, holding wrongdoers responsible in order to deter crimes since they cost too much?

Why keep raising the taxes and costs on lawabiding citizens who WORK for a living
and adding the expenses of people who don't?

Is this sustainable or ethical? Is it consistent with enforcing laws, encouraging and rewarding lawabiding conduct, and holding wrongdoers responsible for crimes or damages?

Do you as working taxpayer agree to pay your labor and taxes into this system?
I don't. it makes no sense and is killing the economy and turning people against
each other politically and ruining government that is supposed to be defending laws
not charging taxpayers for crimes to create jobs for bureaucrats profiting from not solving these problems.

This is involuntary servitude for anyone else besides just me who NEVER AGREED
to work under these conditions of political and economic slavery of the working people. Taxed without being represented.
Now facing mandates under a business contract and terms with insurance corporations we didn't agree to sign our names to.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I gotta wonder if anyone gets that the effect of ACA is a benefit to individuals in the labor force.

With some percentage deciding to work fewer hours, supply of labor is less than it would otherwise be.

Demand for labor is expected to continue to be higher than would otherwise be expected as GDP continues to trend towards potential GDP.

The combination of reduced supply and increased demand has a net positive effect. This means that individuals participating in the labor force will find jobs more readily.

I wonder if you get that you are full of shit.

Let me explain, in detail, why. People have always been able to chose to not to work, Obamacare did zip to benefit anyone who wants to do something like that. In fact, I can easily argue that the increased premiums and deductibles, coupled with a legal requirement, aka mandate, to have insurance even if you have enough money to pay for any medical care you need, actually discourages people in that situation from pursuing their dreams. That is speculative though, so we will skip going into detail about that, and simply explode your claim that this is good for the individual.

The CBO has projected that low income individuals will be forced to chose between earning more money and complying with the new taxes. You can blather all day long about how this is a good thing, but you are limiting their choices, which is never good. They used to be able to pick up more hours in order to be able to afford to buy their child some new clothes or a computer. If they do that now they will be faced with a sharp increase in both their premiums and their deductibles. Not good.

The CBO also projects that some businesses will reduce employee hours, and even staffing, to avoid the higher taxes on employees that exist under Obamacare. Yes, they say the numbers will be small, but in a workforce of around 200 million even small percentage turns into a pretty significant real world impact. I agree with them that this will be offset, in the long run, by other jobs created elsewhere, but it still is a negative impact that hurts the individual, even if it is good for the group.

And, finally, we come to the last proof that this is not good for the individual, the fact that all of this will force some people to work more in order to stay in the same place. That's right, the CBO actually said that Obamacare will make it worse for some people. The reason for this is quite simple, this is an after income tax. That means that, unlike an increase in income tax that people is passed on as a reduction in income, this is actually paid out of pocket. This has a more direct impact on people who pay it, and it turns out that this affects them in different ways than taxes that they don't directly pay.

Feel free to cherry pick the CBO report in an attempt to refute my arguments, you will fail. The reason for that is I am not cherry picking, I am actually using the entire report to show the obvious negative effects of Obamacare on the individual. The collectivists and statists see this as progress, which is why they are willing to lie about it. The individualists, like me, see this as slavery, which is why we oppose it with truth.

 

[william the wie]

The deciding factor will not be how many jobs this idiocy costs but how many deaths will be attributed to it.

 

[LoneLaugher]

You've been ***** slapped up one side and down the other.

Run along and jerk off over Hillary's picture.

Funny.......I didn't feel a thing.

How many jobs did the CBO say would be lost, again?

Your health care--Dictator and Chief just postponed the employer MANDATE again--now until 2016? I believe they have FINALLY realized just how devastating to the economy--in lost jobs and full time workers becoming part time workers overnight--should the law be enforced.
White House delays health insurance mandate for medium-size employers until 2016 - The Washington Post


And of course again--Obama usurped his constitutional authority to do it.

Generally speaking, you get past the next election by changing your policies, by announcing new initiatives, but not by wantonly changing the law, lawlessly. I mean, this is stuff that you do in a banana republic. It’s as if the law is simply a blackboard on which Obama writes any number he wants, any delay he wants and any provision. It’s now reached a point where it is so endemic that nobody even notices or complains. I think if the complaints had started with the first arbitrary changes, and these are are not adjustments or transitions. These are political decisions to minimize the impact leading up to an election, and it’s changing the law in a way that you are not allowed to do. … It’s not incompetence. Willful breaking of the constitutional order — where in the Constitution is the president allowed to alter a law 27 times after it’s been passed?

Krauthammer: These ObamaCare changes are getting so endemic, ?nobody even complains? anymore « Hot Air

Welcome to your hope and change!

Nah. An adjustment. Big law. Needs tweaking. Normal people can grasp that fact.

How are you coming along with drafting your apology? Making progress?