the hours were cut because his employer is an unadulterated a-hole.
Really? Then why don't you hire him with a "living wage" & full benefits?
You never answer that question for some reason.
Obamacare’s scorekeepers deliver a game-changer
By Dana Milbank, Washington Post Tuesday, February 4, 8:12 PM
For years, the White House has trotted out the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office to show that Obamacare would cut health-care costs and reduce deficits:
Live by the sword, die by the sword, the Bible tells us. In Washington, it’s slightly different: Live by the CBO, die by the CBO.
The congressional number-crunchers, perhaps the capital’s closest thing to a neutral referee, came out with a new report Tuesday, and it wasn’t pretty for Obamacare. The CBO predicted the law (Obamacare) would have a “substantially larger” impact on the labor market than it had previously expected: The law would reduce the workforce in 2021 by the equivalent of 2.3 million full-time workers, well more than the 800,000 originally anticipated.
What Milbank was trying to point out is that the upcoming mid-term elections are about low-informational ideologue voters coming out in force and that a 100+ page CBO report is perfect for getting them foaming at the mouth with twisted propaganda over something the report doesn't actually say but that they would never bother to independently think through for themselves - i.e., Koch Brothers' sheeple.
I realize it is worthless to inject some truth into the dead enders' echo chamber, but just for fun, I'll do it anyway (or, one can go to any of the mass media outlets and watch them stumble all over themselves trying to correct their falling for the initial propaganda over the CBO report - it is pretty funny as well as possible instructive, for some).
- CBO didn't say 2.5 million people would be given pink slips. What they did say is "hours worked" would be reduce to a level equivalent to 2.5 million leaving the workforce.
- Those reducing their hours, including those that just quit altogether, would be doing so voluntarily
- basically, they were working ONLY to gain access to less-expensive health insurance. Up until this year, the heavily govt subsidized employer-based insurance results in a price subsidy for those employed. That creates a barrier to those who would prefer to be self-employed, women who would prefer to spend time with their kids rather than co-workers, or older people who would like to quit a dead end job but can't due to losing health coverage. Obamacare changes all that for them by leveling the playing field between employer-based insurance and non-employer based insurance. That personal freedom is something that many in the echo chamber will occasionally tout; to whine about it now seems a bit hypocritical.
- Employers still need those working hours; the ACA impact is on the supply of labor side, not the demand side. As a result, this might put some upward pressure on wages but given that for every job opening, there are 2-3 applicants, probable not much. But even if it does result in wage increases, in our economy, that would be a very very good thing.
Even Paul Ryan gets it -
Paul Ryan Fact-Checks Republicans On Obamacare Job 'Costs'
Here's some other items in the CBO report that one will not find in the dead enders' echo chamber -
- Regarding real jobs:
"On page 124, the report estimates that the ACA will "boost overall demand for goods and services over the next few years because the people who will benefit from the expansion of Medicaid and from access to the exchange subsidies are predominantly in lower-income households and thus are likely to spend a considerable fraction of their additional resources on goods and services." This, the report says, "will in turn boost demand for labor over the next few years."
- regarding 'insurer bailouts':
“CBO now projects that, over the 2015–2017 period, risk corridor payments from the federal government to health insurers will total $8 billion and that the corresponding collections from insurers will amount to $16 billion, yielding net savings for the federal government of $8 billion.” (Page 116)
A bailout where the govt makes $8 billion??? Also, this makes 'not enough young signing up' even if it happens (doubtful) a moot point
- regarding premiums:
“CBO and JCT lowered their estimate of average premiums for insurance coverage through exchanges in 2014 by about 15 percent on the basis of a preliminary analysis of plans offered through exchanges. Because the information about premiums and enrollment is still limited, however, CBO and JCT have not adjusted their projections of premiums for years after 2014. (Page 120)
- regarding the deficit:
The federal budget deficit has fallen sharply during the past few years, and it is on a path to decline further this year and next year. CBO estimates that under current law, the deficit will total $514 billion in fiscal year 2014, compared with $1.4 trillion in 2009. At that level, this year’s deficit would equal 3.0 percent of the nation’s economic output, or gross domestic product (GDP)—close to the average percentage of GDP seen during the past 40 years.
CBO Report - generally good news for most. But for O'care dead enders, a sad. A big sad, but obviously not big enough to stop the dead enders' spin, eh?
John Galt shrugged, outsourced to Red China and opened a hedge fund for unregulated securitized credit derivatives.
If the world didn't suck, wouldn't we all just fly off?