Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 17412
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby John Q. Public » Mon Feb 10, 2014 10:51 pm

We will lose people on the SUPPLY side. That's how it's supposed to work and that's how it hasn't worked in five years! This is good news. Honest!

We won't lose jobs. We'll gain them.


Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 23021
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby Wabash » Mon Feb 10, 2014 10:52 pm

Absolutely right VP and Fordy. Don't both of you know there's like thousands (maybe millions) of folks out there who were going to invent the next iPod and make billions. Create thousands of jobs. Live a life of private jets and mega yachts.

But they've decided to live off government welfare instead because that lifestyle is much more desirable.
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 23021
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby Wabash » Wed Feb 12, 2014 9:22 am

The paradox of conservative thinking is apparent in some of the remarks here.

We must give tax breaks to the very wealthy and give them more money so they will be fully motivated.

But if we give money to the vulnerable they will be less motivated to be productive.
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

User avatar
AsIfYouKnew
Posts: 7264
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:01 am

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby AsIfYouKnew » Thu Feb 13, 2014 2:38 pm

How are we freeing 250 million people when non-farm payroll is only about 138 million?
When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
Jonathan Swift

http://www.civilityinamerica.org/en/index.html

User avatar
Omar Bongo
Posts: 7308
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 11:59 pm

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby Omar Bongo » Thu Feb 13, 2014 8:27 pm

"The CBO states that over the next 10 year period, the effects of Obamacare is that we will lose jobs, and our economy will be slowed down."

No, it doesn't. Provide a quote or stop spreading lies.

Oh, and you conveniently left out some things that actually were in the report - that "insurance premiums under the law are 15 percent lower than originally forecast", that “the slowdown in Medicare cost growth" is "broad and persistent" and that enrollments will catch up over time to where they would have been without the troubled rollout.

Just an oversight, I'm sure.
"Trump is what he is, a floundering, inarticulate jumble of gnawing insecurities and not-at-all compensating vanities, which is pathetic."
George Will

"How stupid is our country?"
Donald Trump

User avatar
sbayhills
Posts: 6887
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:20 pm

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby sbayhills » Thu Feb 13, 2014 9:51 pm

sbayhills wrote:The CBO states that over the next 10 year period, the effects of Obamacare is that we will lose jobs, and our economy will be slowed down."

Omar Bongo wrote:No, it doesn't. Provide a quote or stop spreading lies.


You're way out of line there Omar. The lies you shouldn't ignore were from the President who blatantly said things he knew weren't true, to garner the votes to get this drag on the economy passed.
But don't let the truth get in the way of attacking the messenger.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... story.html
Health-care law will prompt over 2 million to quit jobs or cut hours, a CBO report says

More than 2 million Americans who would otherwise rely on a job for health insurance will quit working, reduce their hours or stop looking for employment because of new health benefits available under the Affordable Care Act, congressional budget analysts said Tuesday.


On Tuesday, few Democrats publicly defended the law, a sign that lawmakers recognize its vulnerability. In its report, the CBO said severe technical problems during the October rollout of the HealthCare.gov Web site will sharply curtail enrollment this year.

But the report also contained a setback for the White House. The CBO predicts that the economy will have the equivalent of 2.3 million fewer full-time workers by 2021 as a result of the law — nearly three times previous estimates.

After obtaining coverage under the health-care law, some workers will choose to forgo employment, the report said, while others will voluntarily reduce their hours. That is because insurance subsidies under the law become less generous as income rises, so workers will have less incentive to work more or at all.

The design of the subsidies — like many programs in the social safety net — represents “an implicit tax on additional work,” CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf said.


Not much help with the GNP, when people are paid not to work. This law is unsustainable.

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 17412
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby John Q. Public » Thu Feb 13, 2014 10:01 pm

Health-care law will prompt over 2 million to quit jobs or cut hours,...

Quit their jobs, not lose their jobs. Quit their jobs. There's a difference.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
Omar Bongo
Posts: 7308
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 11:59 pm

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby Omar Bongo » Thu Feb 13, 2014 10:34 pm

Golly SBH, by some rare oversight you managed to cut this quote out of your pastejob. It's just a minor detail I know, but it may be of some small importance to the debate about what the report actually said concerning jobs. To wit:

" In an implicit rebuke of GOP talking points, the CBO said that there was little evidence the health-care law is affecting employment and that businesses are not expected to significantly reduce head count or hours as a result of the law ".

You didn't think this tidbit warranted any attention? How does it feel to be implicitly rebuked by the very report you're trumpeting?

BTW, thanks for the link!

Now try to think outside the Anti-Obama box for a moment...our traditional employer-based system locked people into jobs they wanted to leave but couldn’t because they wouldn’t be able to get coverage elsewhere.

Now, people approaching 65 who are effectively too sick or disabled to work, but too young to qualify for Medicare can leave their jobs and still get "bridge coverage" elsewhere until they do. Those jobs will be freed up for unemployed people. Win-win!

Now families with young children in which one parent would like to stop working for a while to take care of the kids can do so even if neither parent receives employer-provided family coverage. Family values and another job for someone who needs it. Win-win!

From E.J. Dionne of the same newspaper you quoted:

"The reaction to the CBO study is an example of how willfully stupid — there’s no other word — the debate over Obamacare has become. Opponents don’t look to a painstaking analysis for enlightenment. They twist its findings and turn them into dishonest slogans."

Does E.J. read this forum? :D
"Trump is what he is, a floundering, inarticulate jumble of gnawing insecurities and not-at-all compensating vanities, which is pathetic."
George Will

"How stupid is our country?"
Donald Trump

User avatar
sbayhills
Posts: 6887
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:20 pm

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby sbayhills » Thu Feb 13, 2014 11:18 pm

The reaction to the CBO study is an example of how willfully stupid — there’s no other word — the debate over Obamacare has become. Opponents don’t look to a painstaking analysis for enlightenment. They twist its findings and turn them into dishonest slogans."

A completely partisan comment. For someone to be so willfully partisan to see things only the way they want to makes them lose credibility. I submit that E.J. is the one being willfully stupid, if E.J. looks at it so onesided.The CBO report had things which both pro and anti could take to support their positions.

You guys think are thinking with your heart and not your brains. Despite the good that you believe will happen to those it could help, the young and healthy have shown that they will not sign up because of the higher than expected premiums. There is not enough funds to pay for this, and it will continue to slow the economy.

The latest delay in the implementation only supports the problems. Purely political to move additional negativit until after the 2014 elections. But I do appreciate the spin from both the WH, and those who still try to make something positive out of this situation.

Speaking of dishonest slogans. Where did job lock come from?

User avatar
Fordama
Posts: 17917
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:12 pm

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby Fordama » Fri Feb 14, 2014 6:11 am

A completely partisan comment.


And yet completely accurate. Isn't it ironic?

Fordama
This country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them.---JFK

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 23021
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby Wabash » Fri Feb 14, 2014 6:30 am

SBH wrote: Speaking of dishonest slogans. Where did job lock come from?

Probably from the same source as the term "golden handcuffs."
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

User avatar
sbayhills
Posts: 6887
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:20 pm

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby sbayhills » Fri Feb 14, 2014 7:41 am

And yet completely accurate. Isn't it ironic?
Fordama

For someone to be so willfully partisan to see things only the way they want to makes them lose credibility.


Willfully stupid would better describe those that keep defending this bill through every lie, misstep, fraudulent misrepresentation, miscalculation, flaw, and revelation.

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 17412
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby John Q. Public » Fri Feb 14, 2014 7:55 am

SB, before you accuse me of it again, I'm not "spinning" anything. I've only pointed out that what you're claiming to be bad news is actually very good news and that people quitting their jobs doesn't equate to them losing their jobs.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
sbayhills
Posts: 6887
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:20 pm

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby sbayhills » Fri Feb 14, 2014 8:17 am

I understand your point JQP. I just feel like the Government shouldn't be paying people not to work.

I've been a straight commission salesman all my life, and I understand how incentives work. When someone has an incentive not to work as hard, production will fall off.

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 17412
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby John Q. Public » Fri Feb 14, 2014 8:30 am

I'm guessing that for a good number of people who are in that position, production fell off long ago.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

RedFred
Posts: 571
Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2013 1:55 pm

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby RedFred » Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:12 am

So quitting your job because there is now government assistance available is a good thing? I follow the part about a job now being available to someone unemployed. However I can't imagine the tax revenue collected from this position would even pay for the subsidies being collected by the freeloader. Let alone the message it is sending to the guy who took over the job, " Hey buddy you've been on the dole too long, it's somebody elses turn"

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 17412
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby John Q. Public » Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:44 am

So you're calling the wife of a UPS employee or the guy who took a second job at Starbucks to get insurance or the guy who worked construction for 40 years but isn't getting much work these days freeloaders? Not everybody who would qualify is a deadbeat, despite your cynicism about your fellow human beings.

And, except for rounding errors, I'd imagine that the tax "drain" for the person who quits would be about the same as the tax contribution from the person who replaced them. Except we wouldn't be paying him Unemployment any more, so the net could very well be positive.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

RedFred
Posts: 571
Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2013 1:55 pm

Re: Editorial: Obamacare choice: job or subsidies

Postby RedFred » Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:50 am

It might be positive if you leave out the cost of Obamacare

Return to “The Economy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest