New CBO report is devastating for Obamacare

[Quantum Windbag]

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?

That is ten more people than I have on my list.

I wonder, which of us is more intolerant?

 

[william the wie]

More like who values their time more and by the way 10 was my peak it is less than that now.

 

[TooTall]

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.

Good post. I was called an idiot for giving what I considered a reasonable answer to a rather inane question and then let my temper moderate my good judgement. I very seldom resort to name calling, and when I do it is because someone insulted me first. Not cool, but it is what it is.

 

[LoneLaugher]

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.

Earlier.....I linked to the LA Times. In the article, the Times linked to the relevant section in the report....which I also read.

Try to understand and follow along, please. .

Here it is again.

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-cbo-20140204,0,3106578.story#axzz2sdMpHIYP

See where they link to pp117-127? That is what I read. That is what I said I read.

Will you issue an apology?

 

[L.K.Eder]

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.

very telling that you stopped quoting the report at that point.

 

[Antares]

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?

I hold a special animus towards liars, and this kid lies through his teeth at every turn...SIMPLY to protect King Obama.

People like him and Greenteeth post their shit and hope others don't take the time to investigate what they post....I enjoy bitch slapping them.

 

[LoneLaugher]

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?

I hold a special animus towards liars, and this kid lies through his teeth at every turn...SIMPLY to protect King Obama.

People like him and Greenteeth post their shit and hope others don't take the time to investigate what they post....I enjoy bitch slapping them.

You have never once witnessed me telling a lie here. Period.

 

[billyerock1991]

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.

go listen to Paul Ryan ... then go read the damn report ... then pull your head out of your ass ... has nothing to do with fewer jobs... it has everything to do with people not having to be forced to work long hours to get health care you idiot !!!!

 

[billyerock1991]

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.

you do say stupid shit at times... lets see here... suck ass policy. verse nothing???? HIUMMM what would you do???? myself, I'd pick the suck ass policy... its better then losing everything you own now isn't it ???

 

[billyerock1991]

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.

go back read his post again the one where he tells you about the link to the report ... do you have a comprehension problem or what???

 

[MeBelle]

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.

go back read his post again the one where he tells you about the link to the report ... do you have a comprehension problem or what???

Copy write and all that stuff...

 

[MeBelle]

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.

Speaking of jokes...second paragraph, first sentence, gives a link to the pdf.
All 182 pages of it!

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/45010-Outlook2014.pdf

If you don't work in the field the least you could do is research before you type.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

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.

very telling that you stopped quoting the report at that point.

The report does not say what the rw's want it to say and what fux lies reported it said.

 

[MeBelle]

The report does not say what the rw's want it to say and what fux lies reported it said.

^^^ another one who didn't read the CBO report.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/45010-Outlook2014.pdf

page 8

Deficits Are Projected to Decline
Through 2015 but Rise Thereafter,
Further Boosting Federal Debt


oops, you did it again.

You need to stop watching fux!

 

[MeBelle]

You have never once witnessed me telling a lie here. Period.

That is correct!

Misinformed perhaps or lack of knowledge, but never an outright lie!

 

[MeBelle]

Earlier.....I linked to the LA Times. In the article, the Times linked to the relevant section in the report....which I also read.

Try to understand and follow along, please. .

Here it is again.

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

See where they link to pp117-127? That is what I read. That is what I said I read.

Will you issue an apology?

Apples and bananas...

That wasn't the CBO report you linked to...it was an opinion piece to the original article the OP posted.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Earlier.....I linked to the LA Times. In the article, the Times linked to the relevant section in the report....which I also read.

Try to understand and follow along, please. .

Here it is again.

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

See where they link to pp117-127? That is what I read. That is what I said I read.

Will you issue an apology?

Apples and bananas...

That wasn't the CBO report you linked to...it was an opinion piece to the original article the OP posted.

for fucks sake, the link to appendix c is in the la times link.

 

[MeBelle]

for fucks sake, the link to appendix c is in the la times link.

Yes, yes...10 pages from an 182 page non-partisan report tells the whole story!

 

[L.K.Eder]

for fucks sake, the link to appendix c is in the la times link.

Yes, yes...10 pages from an 182 page non-partisan report tells the whole story!

when the topic is effect of the ACA on the labor market, and specifically the updated estimates, then appendix c is the relevant part. not the whole CBO report.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's funny is that as usual the entire rightwing propaganda machine bought into the same lies about the report and since there is no page in the rightwing playbook that allows for admitting a mistake,

once again, the RW machine is forced to defend an indefensible position.