General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGOP Lies: CBO Obamacare Projections Are 2 Million Fewer Full-Time WORKERS, not JOBS.
Last edited Tue Feb 4, 2014, 07:07 PM - Edit history (2)
And Fox News CONTINUES to lie on their website with this blaring lie of a headline in the biggest font they could find:
"Cost Of Obamacare: 2.3 Million Jobs!"
AND the New York Times had to change their title and issue a correction:
"Correction: February 4, 2014
An earlier version of a headline accompanying this article on the home page was incorrect. The health law is projected to result in two million fewer workers, according to the Congressional Budget Office, not two million fewer jobs."
The hair trigger response of not just the right wing media to attack Obama and the ACA is starting to give away their game:
"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....."
Health Care Law May Result in 2 Million Fewer Full-Time Workers
New York Times
WASHINGTON A new analysis from the Congressional Budget Office says that the Affordable Care Act will result in more than 2 million fewer full-time workers in the next several years, providing Republican opponents of the law a powerful political weapon leading up to this years midterm elections.
The law is also expected to have a significant effect on hours worked, the nonpartisan budget office said in a regular update to its budget projections released Tuesday. * With the expansion of insurance coverage, more workers will choose not to work and others will choose to work fewer hours than they might have otherwise, it said.* The decline in hours worked will translate into a loss of the equivalent of 2.5 million full-time positions by 2024, the budget office said.
The budget office analysis found that much of the laws effect comes from reducing the need for people to take a full-time job just to get insurance coverage, and from the premium subsidies effectively bolstering household income.
___________
From CBO report, page 123:
How Much Will the ACA Reduce
Employment in the Longer Term?
"The ACAs largest impact on labor markets will probably occur after 2016, once its major provisions have taken
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; however, CBO has not tried to quantify those two components of the overall effect. 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, so it will appear almost entirely as a reduction in labor force participation and in hours worked relative to what would have occurred otherwise...."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/05/us/politics/budget-office-revises-estimates-of-health-care-enrollment.html?hp&_r=0
More:
"One good corrective source on this is "No, CBO Did Not Say Obamacare Will Kill 2 Million Jobs" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/02/04/no-cbo-di... ) by Washington Post Factchecker Glenn Kessler.
Per his fact-check, the CBO report is saying that a certain number of workers will leave the workforce or reduce their hours if they are no longer "locked" into a job just to get health insurance. (In other words, instead of their job, they might choose early retirement, staying home with kids, becoming a family caregiver, starting a business, being a freelancer, going part-time, and so on.) The CBO is estimating how many workers will make those choices. That's it."
TheMathieu
(456 posts)The smaller the pond employers have to fish from, the larger the bait.
This is actually a good thing.
Maybe the exploited working poor can have a marginal amount of leverage for once.
seveneyes
(4,631 posts)With 11 to 20 million new citizens, there will be plenty of people to fill all those missing full time jobs.
renate
(13,776 posts)... it's not surprising that the misunderstanding was so immediate and reflexive. It's probably not fair to say "somebody should have been in charge of writing a better press release," especially since the CBO is non-partisan, but it's pretty unfortunate that the administration is now going to be on defense rather than offense. It could have been presented as such a huge plus, people no longer being trapped in horrible jobs, etc.
Response to renate (Reply #2)
Fred Sanders This message was self-deleted by its author.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)actual meaning of the language and are now just up to the usual twisting of the language and lying.
Rand Paul is still lying that this means there will be 2 million fewer jobs, they never give up because they never get called out in the mass media.
renate
(13,776 posts)http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/05/us/politics/budget-office-revises-estimates-of-health-care-enrollment.html?hp&_r=0
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)kelly1mm
(4,735 posts)retirement due to lack of affordable HI.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)kelly1mm
(4,735 posts)post ACA is $1200 per year. That is 14800 I don't have to spend out of retirement savings. With that much less out of pocket per year, my current retirement assets will cover (with some left over) my cost of living. It would not cover the extra 14.4k per year.
JI7
(89,287 posts)because they don't want to lose their healthcare ?