New CBO report is devastating for Obamacare

[MeBelle]

Nutters.........too lazy to even try to understand shit.

Why the new CBO report on Obamacare is good news - latimes.com

Good news, bitches. Good news.

Not worth 2 million jobs there sparky

-Geaux

Sparky?

If you are going to be condescending, please try to be accurate. The report did not say we were losing jobs.

You might try reading it. Then commenting. It works better that way.

You read the 182 page report?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Not worth 2 million jobs there sparky

-Geaux

Sparky?

If you are going to be condescending, please try to be accurate. The report did not say we were losing jobs.

You might try reading it. Then commenting. It works better that way.

You read the 182 page report?

Nope. I read the section that pertained to the impact on the employment pool.

Isn't this fun?!

 

[TemplarKormac]

Nutters.........too lazy to even try to understand shit.

Why the new CBO report on Obamacare is good news - latimes.com

Good news, bitches. Good news.

Not worth 2 million jobs there sparky

-Geaux

Sparky?

If you are going to be condescending, please try to be accurate. The report did not say we were losing jobs.

You might try reading it. Then commenting. It works better that way.

Hey sparky, stop being lazy:

"...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. Although CBO projects that total employment (and compensation) will increase over the coming decade, that increase will be smaller than it would have been in the absence of the ACA. The decline in full-time-equivalent employment stemming from the ACA will consist of some people not being employed at all and other people working fewer hours..."

The Budget and Economic Outlook 2014 to 2024 - CBO, Page 117

Job losses or no, any self proclaimed liberal would be appalled at how many people are having their hours cut, salaries reduced or are potentially about to lose their jobs because of the ACA. To sit there and continue to tout this law despite the detrimental effect on Americans is self centered. The law is a failure. You can call me all the names under the sun, call me fat or tell me to get a job, but it's time for you to acknowledge reality.

 

[Politico]

I don't think anything can destroy Obamacare.

Yeah nothing. Just the voters. And we know what idiots they are.

 

[MeBelle]

Sparky?

If you are going to be condescending, please try to be accurate. The report did not say we were losing jobs.

You might try reading it. Then commenting. It works better that way.

You read the 182 page report?

Nope. I read the section that pertained to the impact on the employment pool.

Isn't this fun?!

Very much fun!
You tell Geaux4it to read the report yet you haven't done so your-self.

Pot/Kettle.

You cherry pic the portions that support your ideology.
Very sad for you.

 

[TooTall]

A sure sign of an idiot is being unable to accept the concession of his opponent. I just admitted that I did not get my meaning across well. Your response is to tell me...again...that I did not get my meaning across well. Congratulations on your complete lack of class.

You conceded that you weren't clear and and called me an idiot for not being able to understand what you meant to say. However, I do apologize for calling an ignorant piece of dog squeeze a dipshit.

No. I called you an idiot for your inability to understand that which you are commenting on.

I understand that if more people are working part time jobs in order to get money from the government to pay for their health insurance there are a number of unintended consequences. Here are two of them off the top of my head.

One: Their state and federal Income taxes are lower, since they are based on gross earnings, resulting in less tax revenue to the federal and state governments.

Two: Their contribution to Soc Sec and Medicare are less, resulting in a lower Soc Sec benefit at age 65 and less paid into Medicare to keep that program solvent.

Since you think you understand the CBO report, did you see where the money to pay for the additional 2.5 million people that will get government money to pay for their health insurance comes from?

 

[emilynghiem]

You conceded that you weren't clear and and called me an idiot for not being able to understand what you meant to say. However, I do apologize for calling an ignorant piece of dog squeeze a dipshit.

No. I called you an idiot for your inability to understand that which you are commenting on.

I understand that if more people are working part time jobs in order to get money from the government to pay for their health insurance there are a number of unintended consequences. Here are two of them off the top of my head.

One: Their state and federal Income taxes are lower, since they are based on gross earnings, resulting in less tax revenue to the federal and state governments.

Two: Their contribution to Soc Sec and Medicare are less, resulting in a lower Soc Sec benefit at age 65 and less paid into Medicare to keep that program solvent.

Since you think you understand the CBO report, did you see where the money to pay for the additional 2.5 million people that will get government money to pay for their health insurance comes from?

Dear TooTall LoneLaugher and Company:
These are all good points, except for personal comments pointed at people instead of the content of arguments.

Keep in mind, that since both sides are coming into this NOT BELIEVING the arguments of the other, this is not unlike the creation/evolution debate.

From the very onset, both sides seek to defend their beliefs from imposition by the other.
The bill was passed in this manner, and will always be flawed because it imposed a national law WITHOUT PROOF and WITHOUT CONSENT of the taxpayers affected.

All arguments will be interpreted differently, depending which side is defending THEIR BELIEFS about health care and how it should be paid for.

This conflict was not resolved by consensus between pre-existing beliefs (which WILL NOT CHANGE) before passing the bill, so it will never be agreed upon as written and enforced.

Even if this plan "proved to work" it would STILL be against the beliefs of people who disagree with federal government implementing it without amending the Constitution first, and being granted authority by CONSENT of the states and the people VOTING on this change to Constitutional policy and authority. Even if it worked, the objections would remain.

The way I see to resolve this conflict is to SEPARATE policies by belief system, such as by Party, and dividing the taxbase to represent views of the taxpayers in groups, and where they wish to invest their taxes without imposition or conflict with other people or parties.

Under that, I would hold the Democrat Party responsible for implementing and funding the ACA and allow nonsupporters equal option to invest in their own party's alternatives. The transition I support for health care reform is to balance the prison budgets with public health care; along with immigration reform through "earned amnesty" collecting restitution for past violations in order to pay for health care and education instead of charging law abiding taxpayers who committed no crimes. The Greens and Libertarians can either set up their own party-based health care network, or lobby for reform through the other major parties. Let everyone fund and participate freely in their health care system of choice.

Once these plans are proven to work in groups WILLING TO SUPPORT THEM, then other citizens can have a free and equal INFORMED choice of buying into them BY CONSENT.
INSTEAD of being forced by law WITHOUT PROOF and/or WITHOUT CONSENT which is a blatant violation of religious freedom and equal Constitutional protections of individual rights. Otherwise this imposition constitutes taxation without representation and INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE by forcing people to "give up our labor" to pay insurance companies we did not agree to contract any business with under terms we didn't vote on.

 

[william the wie]

Making economic arguments over a program that is already being attacked successfully an instrument of killing does divert Ds from the schwerpunkt.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Not worth 2 million jobs there sparky

-Geaux

Sparky?

If you are going to be condescending, please try to be accurate. The report did not say we were losing jobs.

You might try reading it. Then commenting. It works better that way.

You read the 182 page report?

He didn't even read the appendix that discuss the impacts of Obamacare. If he did he would know that the reason the CBO is expecting people to work less is that taxes on work will force them to chose between making more money or paying for suck ass insurance policies that they didn't want in the first place.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Sparky?

If you are going to be condescending, please try to be accurate. The report did not say we were losing jobs.

You might try reading it. Then commenting. It works better that way.

You read the 182 page report?

Nope. I read the section that pertained to the impact on the employment pool.

Isn't this fun?!

No you didn't, you read what the LA Times told you to believe about it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You conceded that you weren't clear and and called me an idiot for not being able to understand what you meant to say. However, I do apologize for calling an ignorant piece of dog squeeze a dipshit.

No. I called you an idiot for your inability to understand that which you are commenting on.

I understand that if more people are working part time jobs in order to get money from the government to pay for their health insurance there are a number of unintended consequences. Here are two of them off the top of my head.

One: Their state and federal Income taxes are lower, since they are based on gross earnings, resulting in less tax revenue to the federal and state governments.

Two: Their contribution to Soc Sec and Medicare are less, resulting in a lower Soc Sec benefit at age 65 and less paid into Medicare to keep that program solvent.

Since you think you understand the CBO report, did you see where the money to pay for the additional 2.5 million people that will get government money to pay for their health insurance comes from?

You missed the really fun one, the same people that insist that women having the ability to earn a living frees them from being dependent on men are now arguing that women being dependent on government frees them from the ability to earn a living.

 

[Antares]

Sparky?

If you are going to be condescending, please try to be accurate. The report did not say we were losing jobs.

You might try reading it. Then commenting. It works better that way.

You read the 182 page report?

Nope. I read the section that pertained to the impact on the employment pool.

Isn't this fun?!

You are either lying or you did not read it.....or you did not understand it.....I think you are lying just like ole Greenteeth did.

 

[Truthseeker420]

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

 

[LoneLaugher]

You read the 182 page report?

Nope. I read the section that pertained to the impact on the employment pool.

Isn't this fun?!

You are either lying or you did not read it.....or you did not understand it.....I think you are lying just like ole Greenteeth did.

I linked to it, asshole. It was provided to me by the LA Times......nice and neat.

You assholes have run with ANOTHER misrepresentation of the facts. Nearly every day....you guys take a statement or a report or a news item....and interpret it in a way that condemns the POTUS. In most cases, you are simply being dishonest

You are all just a joke at this point.

 

[Antares]

Nope. I read the section that pertained to the impact on the employment pool.

Isn't this fun?!

You are either lying or you did not read it.....or you did not understand it.....I think you are lying just like ole Greenteeth did.

I linked to it, asshole. It was provided to me by the LA Times......nice and neat.

You assholes have run with ANOTHER misrepresentation of the facts. Nearly every day....you guys take a statement or a report or a news item....and interpret it in a way that condemns the POTUS. In most cases, you are simply being dishonest

You are all just a joke at this point.

LOL, ok you read the Times report on it, I read the report....it doesn't say what YOU say it says....and I've already used the report itself to refute the silly shit you are lying about.

Perhaps when you grow up you can read the ACTUAL report and understand it.

 

[Sunshine]

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.

What is left to do or say except for one to throw up their hands and say, 'he got his way.'

He did.

That's pretty much all there is to it.

 

[LoneLaugher]

You are either lying or you did not read it.....or you did not understand it.....I think you are lying just like ole Greenteeth did.

I linked to it, asshole. It was provided to me by the LA Times......nice and neat.

You assholes have run with ANOTHER misrepresentation of the facts. Nearly every day....you guys take a statement or a report or a news item....and interpret it in a way that condemns the POTUS. In most cases, you are simply being dishonest

You are all just a joke at this point.

LOL, ok you read the Times report on it, I read the report....it doesn't say what YOU say it says....and I've already used the report itself to refute the silly shit you are lying about.

Perhaps when you grow up you can read the ACTUAL report and understand it.

I read the section of the report that deals with employment. I told you that.

You read the entire report? Why are you lying?

 

[Antares]

I linked to it, asshole. It was provided to me by the LA Times......nice and neat.

You assholes have run with ANOTHER misrepresentation of the facts. Nearly every day....you guys take a statement or a report or a news item....and interpret it in a way that condemns the POTUS. In most cases, you are simply being dishonest

You are all just a joke at this point.

LOL, ok you read the Times report on it, I read the report....it doesn't say what YOU say it says....and I've already used the report itself to refute the silly shit you are lying about.

Perhaps when you grow up you can read the ACTUAL report and understand it.

I read the section of the report that deals with employment. I told you that.

You read the entire report? Why are you lying?

Kid if you read it you did NOT understand it, I know you need to protect the King...I read the Labor, the Medicaid and the "revised projections" about the costs.

LL you have no credibility, none.

 

[william the wie]

Antares, I have never had more than 10 people at one time on my ignore list at USMB LL is one of the very few who make the cut. Perhaps he should make yours?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I linked to it, asshole. It was provided to me by the LA Times......nice and neat.

You assholes have run with ANOTHER misrepresentation of the facts. Nearly every day....you guys take a statement or a report or a news item....and interpret it in a way that condemns the POTUS. In most cases, you are simply being dishonest

You are all just a joke at this point.

LOL, ok you read the Times report on it, I read the report....it doesn't say what YOU say it says....and I've already used the report itself to refute the silly shit you are lying about.

Perhaps when you grow up you can read the ACTUAL report and understand it.

I read the section of the report that deals with employment. I told you that.

You read the entire report? Why are you lying?

You just said you read the LA Times, not the report.