Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
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.
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.
Thread title:
New CBO report is devastating for Obamacare
Again, if a person doesn't work in the healthcare field, ten pages is meaningless.
Get it now?
Doubtful, but am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.
Anddddd, my first patient is calling.
Later tater!
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.
Did the LW read the 182 page non partisan CBO report?
How is non partisan 'propaganda'?
The CBO report lies, 'eh?
Where do you think the ACA numbers originally come from?
Deen, you do realize that the rich will always have healthcare insurance and will not lose an hour of work to try and get gov. subsidies. Those are the people who will keep accumulating wealth.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.
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.
Did the LW read the 182 page non partisan CBO report?
How is non partisan 'propaganda'?
The CBO report lies, 'eh?
Where do you think the ACA numbers originally come from?
The report is a no worries event. The CBO as usual tilted way left. What you lefties are neglecting is that published data on what has happened for example employment and UE both lagging population growth for Dec. and Jan. means that your policies are an existential threat to marginal workers and they know it.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.
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.
Did the LW read the 182 page non partisan CBO report?
How is non partisan 'propaganda'?
The CBO report lies, 'eh?
Where do you think the ACA numbers originally come from?
It's been proven that the rightwing's interpretation of the report is WRONG,
your inane denials notwithstanding.
Because the largest declines in labor
supply will probably occur among lower-wage workers,
the reduction in aggregate compensation (wages, salaries,
and fringe benefits)and the impact on the overall economy
will be proportionally smaller than the reduction in
hours worked.
The impact will be smaller because they don't make much to start with...but hey they won't be tied down just any old McDonalds.....they'll be "free" to spend more time with the kids they can't feed.
The next claim....
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; however, CBO has not
tried to quantify those two components of the overall
effect.
So it WILL be the cause , but then they say this....
The estimated reduction stems almost entirely
from a net decline in the amount of labor that workers
choose to supply, rather than from a net drop in businesses
demand for labor,
I object your honor...SPECULATION....
Did the LW read the 182 page non partisan CBO report?
How is non partisan 'propaganda'?
The CBO report lies, 'eh?
Where do you think the ACA numbers originally come from?
It's been proven that the rightwing's interpretation of the report is WRONG,
your inane denials notwithstanding.
Its been "proven" by nut jobs like you and left wing pundits?
Nope.
Sweetie I haven't even read any of the articles, just the report, you people are the ones spinning it to support the king.
Now maybe the leftist traitors will get a clue
-Geaux
Obamacare to cut work hours by equivalent of 2 million jobs: CBO | Reuters
(Reuters) - President Barack Obama's healthcare law will reduce American workforce participation by the equivalent of 2 million full-time jobs in 2017, the Congressional Budget Office said on Tuesday, prompting Republicans to paint the law as bad medicine for the U.S. economy.
Another misinterpreted CBO study. You guys do this a lot! It's like you (collectively) read up to the AHA! point and then skip reading the rest. Not so amazingly, the same piece explained why.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...-million-jobs/
I can't wait for the day the right actually starts htinking for itself, although I doubt that'll happen.Here we go again. During the 2012 campaign, The Fact Checker had to repeatedly explain that the Congressional Budget Office never said that the Affordable Care Act killed 800,000 jobs by 2021. Now, the CBO has released an updated estimate, nearly the triple the size of the earlier one: 2.3 million in 2021....
The Fact Checker takes no position on the implications of the CBOs analysis. Some might believe that the overall impact of the health law on employment is bad because it would be encouraging people some 2.3 million not to work. Indeed, the decline in the workforce participation rate has been of concern to economists, as the baby boom generation leaves the work force, and the health-care law appears to exacerbate that trend.
Moreover, the argument could go, this would hurt the nations budget because 2.3 million fewer people will pay taxes on their earnings. Thats certainly an intellectually solid argument though others might counter that universal health care is worth a reduction in overall employment but its not at all the same as saying that all of these jobs would be lost. Some jobs will go away, but the actual number is unclear because of the unknown interaction between part-time and full-time work.
Once again, we award Three Pinocchios to anyone who deliberately gets this wrong.
Three Pinocchios
It's been proven that the rightwing's interpretation of the report is WRONG,
your inane denials notwithstanding.
Its been "proven" by nut jobs like you and left wing pundits?
Nope.
Sweetie I haven't even read any of the articles, just the report, you people are the ones spinning it to support the king.
Proving something does not require getting assholes like you to admit that something was proven, but hey,
by all means, keep making a fool of yourself.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Did the LW read the 182 page non partisan CBO report?
How is non partisan 'propaganda'?
The CBO report lies, 'eh?
Where do you think the ACA numbers originally come from?
It's been proven that the rightwing's interpretation of the report is WRONG,
your inane denials notwithstanding.
